Dried amniotic membrane (AM) can be a useful therapeutic adjunct in ophthalmic surgery and possesses logistical advantages over cryopreserved AM. Differences in preservation techniques can significantly influence the biochemical composition and physical properties of AM, potentially affecting clinical efficacy. This study was established to investigate the biochemical and structural effects of drying AM in the absence and presence of saccharide lyoprotectants and its biocompatibility compared to cryopreserved material. AM was cryopreserved or dried with and without pre-treatment with trehalose or raffinose and the antioxidant epigallocatechin (EGCG). Structural and visual comparisons were assessed using electron microscopy. Localisation, expression and release of AM biological factors were determined using immunoassays and immunofluorescence. The biocompatibility of the AM preparations co-cultured with corneal epithelial cell (CEC) or keratocyte monolayers were assessed using cell proliferation, cytotoxicity, apoptosis and migration assays. Drying devitalised AM epithelium, but less than cryopreservation and cellular damage was reduced in dried AM pre-treated with trehalose or raffinose. Dried AM alone, and with trehalose or raffinose showed greater factor retention efficiencies and bioavailability compared to cryopreserved AM and demonstrated a more sustained biochemical factor time release in vitro. Cellular health assays showed that dried AM with trehalose or raffinose are compatible and superior substrates compared to cryopreserved AM for primary CEC expansion, with increased proliferation and reduced LDH and caspase-3 levels. This concept was supported by improved wound healing in an immortalised human CEC line (hiCEC) co-cultured with dried and trehalose or raffinose membranes, compared to cryopreserved and fresh AM. Our modified preservation process and our resultant optimised dried AM has enhanced structural properties and biochemical stability and is a superior substrate to conventional cryopreserved AM. In addition this product is stable and easily transportable allowing it to be globally wide reaching for use in clinical and military sectors.

Background/Aims To investigate the difference between human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) and human ocular microvascular endothelial cell (MVEC) gene expression, and to determine if these differences could improve the understanding of ocular angiogenic diseases. Methods The gene expression profiles of HUVEC and matched unpassaged human choroidal, retinal and iris endothelial cells were conducted using Affymetrix GeneChip Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 arrays. Selected differences were confirmed by real time PCR. Functional cell proliferation assays were used to support microarray findings. Results HUVEC showed enrichment for probe sets involved in embryological development while ocular MVEC demonstrated enrichment for probe sets for MHC classes I and II, immune responses and cell signal transduction. Comparison of human retinal and choroidal endothelial cells demonstrated significant differences in the expression of probe sets encoding insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) signalling. Cell proliferation assays demonstrated the stimulatory role of IGF-1 on retinal endothelial cells compared with choroidal endothelial cells. Conclusions Gene expression profiling has demonstrated that HUVEC are probably not a suitable surrogate for the study of ocular angiogenic disorders. There are also significant differences in the gene expression of human retinal and choroidal endothelial cells, which may be important in the mechanism and treatment of choroidal and retinal neovascularisation.