Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Jan 15.
Published in final edited form as: Acta Biomater. 2019 Oct 19;102:220–230. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2019.10.019

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3.

Histological comparison and contractile function of EHTs generated from two types of ceil compositions including non-enriched hiPSC-CMs and enriched hiPSC-CMs with HCFs. (A) Schematic diagram depicting design strategy for EHTs. (B) Peak force, cross-sectional area and peak stress of two EHT groups including non-enriched hiPSC-CMs (non-enCMs, 1 million) as well as enriched hiPSC-CMs (0.7 million) with HCF (0.3 million) (enCMs + HCFs). Peak force and peak stress generated in EHTs with HCFs were significantly increased (Student’s T-test; *: p < 0.05, **: p < 0.01) with no change in cross-sectional area (CSA) (Student’s T-test, p = 0.42). (C) EHTs made from either non-enCMs (1 million) alone or co-culture of enCMs (0.7 million) and HCFs (0.3 million) were stained with H&E and cTnT. Nuclei were stained by DAPI. Scale bars = 100 μm.