基于人血浆和自组装组织工程皮肤替代品的体外比较:两种不同的制造工艺,用于治疗深度和难以愈合的损伤。

IF 6.3 1区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY
Burns & Trauma Pub Date : 2023-10-30 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1093/burnst/tkad043
Álvaro Sierra-Sánchez, Brice Magne, Etienne Savard, Christian Martel, Karel Ferland, Martin A Barbier, Anabelle Demers, Danielle Larouche, Salvador Arias-Santiago, Lucie Germain
{"title":"基于人血浆和自组装组织工程皮肤替代品的体外比较:两种不同的制造工艺,用于治疗深度和难以愈合的损伤。","authors":"Álvaro Sierra-Sánchez,&nbsp;Brice Magne,&nbsp;Etienne Savard,&nbsp;Christian Martel,&nbsp;Karel Ferland,&nbsp;Martin A Barbier,&nbsp;Anabelle Demers,&nbsp;Danielle Larouche,&nbsp;Salvador Arias-Santiago,&nbsp;Lucie Germain","doi":"10.1093/burnst/tkad043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this <i>in vitro</i> study was to compare side-by-side two models of human bilayered tissue-engineered skin substitutes (hbTESSs) designed for the treatment of severely burned patients. These are the scaffold-free self-assembled skin substitute (SASS) and the human plasma-based skin substitute (HPSS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fibroblasts and keratinocytes from three humans were extracted from skin biopsies (N = 3) and cells from the same donor were used to produce both hbTESS models. For SASS manufacture, keratinocytes were seeded over three self-assembled dermal sheets comprising fibroblasts and the extracellular matrix they produced (n = 12), while for HPSS production, keratinocytes were cultured over hydrogels composed of fibroblasts embedded in either plasma as unique biomaterial (Fibrin), plasma combined with hyaluronic acid (Fibrin-HA) or plasma combined with collagen (Fibrin-Col) (n/biomaterial = 9). The production time was 46-55 days for SASSs and 32-39 days for HPSSs. Substitutes were characterized by histology, mechanical testing, PrestoBlue™-assay, immunofluorescence (Ki67, Keratin (K) 10, K15, K19, Loricrin, type IV collagen) and Western blot (type I and IV collagens).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The SASSs were more resistant to tensile forces (<i>p-</i>value < 0.01) but less elastic (<i>p-</i>value < 0.001) compared to HPSSs. A higher number of proliferative Ki67<sup>+</sup> cells were found in SASSs although their metabolic activity was lower. After epidermal differentiation, no significant difference was observed in the expression of K10, K15, K19 and Loricrin. Overall, the production of type I and type IV collagens and the adhesive strength of the dermal-epidermal junction was higher in SASSs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates, for the first time, that both hbTESS models present similar <i>in vitro</i> biological characteristics. However, mechanical properties differ and future <i>in vivo</i> experiments will aim to compare their wound healing potential.</p>","PeriodicalId":9553,"journal":{"name":"Burns & Trauma","volume":"11 ","pages":"tkad043"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10615253/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"<i>In vitro</i> comparison of human plasma-based and self-assembled tissue-engineered skin substitutes: two different manufacturing processes for the treatment of deep and difficult to heal injuries.\",\"authors\":\"Álvaro Sierra-Sánchez,&nbsp;Brice Magne,&nbsp;Etienne Savard,&nbsp;Christian Martel,&nbsp;Karel Ferland,&nbsp;Martin A Barbier,&nbsp;Anabelle Demers,&nbsp;Danielle Larouche,&nbsp;Salvador Arias-Santiago,&nbsp;Lucie Germain\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/burnst/tkad043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this <i>in vitro</i> study was to compare side-by-side two models of human bilayered tissue-engineered skin substitutes (hbTESSs) designed for the treatment of severely burned patients. These are the scaffold-free self-assembled skin substitute (SASS) and the human plasma-based skin substitute (HPSS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fibroblasts and keratinocytes from three humans were extracted from skin biopsies (N = 3) and cells from the same donor were used to produce both hbTESS models. For SASS manufacture, keratinocytes were seeded over three self-assembled dermal sheets comprising fibroblasts and the extracellular matrix they produced (n = 12), while for HPSS production, keratinocytes were cultured over hydrogels composed of fibroblasts embedded in either plasma as unique biomaterial (Fibrin), plasma combined with hyaluronic acid (Fibrin-HA) or plasma combined with collagen (Fibrin-Col) (n/biomaterial = 9). The production time was 46-55 days for SASSs and 32-39 days for HPSSs. Substitutes were characterized by histology, mechanical testing, PrestoBlue™-assay, immunofluorescence (Ki67, Keratin (K) 10, K15, K19, Loricrin, type IV collagen) and Western blot (type I and IV collagens).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The SASSs were more resistant to tensile forces (<i>p-</i>value < 0.01) but less elastic (<i>p-</i>value < 0.001) compared to HPSSs. A higher number of proliferative Ki67<sup>+</sup> cells were found in SASSs although their metabolic activity was lower. After epidermal differentiation, no significant difference was observed in the expression of K10, K15, K19 and Loricrin. Overall, the production of type I and type IV collagens and the adhesive strength of the dermal-epidermal junction was higher in SASSs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates, for the first time, that both hbTESS models present similar <i>in vitro</i> biological characteristics. However, mechanical properties differ and future <i>in vivo</i> experiments will aim to compare their wound healing potential.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9553,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Burns & Trauma\",\"volume\":\"11 \",\"pages\":\"tkad043\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10615253/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Burns & Trauma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/burnst/tkad043\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Burns & Trauma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/burnst/tkad043","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:这项体外研究的目的是比较用于治疗严重烧伤患者的两种并排的人类双层组织工程皮肤替代品(hbTESS)模型。这些是无支架的自组装皮肤替代品(SASS)和基于人血浆的皮肤替代物(HPSS) = 3) 并且使用来自同一供体的细胞来产生两种hbTESS模型。对于SASS的制造,将角质形成细胞接种在包括成纤维细胞和它们产生的细胞外基质(n = 12) ,而对于HPSS的生产,角质形成细胞是在水凝胶上培养的,水凝胶由成纤维细胞组成,成纤维细胞包埋在血浆中作为独特的生物材料(纤维蛋白),血浆与透明质酸结合(纤维蛋白HA)或血浆与胶原结合(纤维素Col)(n/生物材料 = 9) 。SASS的生产时间为46-55天,HPSS的生产时间则为32-39天。通过组织学、机械测试、PrestoBlue对替代品进行了表征™-免疫荧光(Ki67,Keratin(K)10,K15,K19,Loricrin,IV型胶原)和Western印迹(I型和IV型胶原蛋白) p值 + 在SASS中发现了细胞,尽管它们的代谢活性较低。表皮分化后,K10、K15、K19和Loricrin的表达没有显著差异。总的来说,SASS中I型和IV型胶原的产生以及真皮-表皮连接处的粘附强度更高。结论:本研究首次证明,两种hbTESS模型都具有相似的体外生物学特性。然而,机械性能各不相同,未来的体内实验将旨在比较它们的伤口愈合潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

<i>In vitro</i> comparison of human plasma-based and self-assembled tissue-engineered skin substitutes: two different manufacturing processes for the treatment of deep and difficult to heal injuries.

<i>In vitro</i> comparison of human plasma-based and self-assembled tissue-engineered skin substitutes: two different manufacturing processes for the treatment of deep and difficult to heal injuries.

<i>In vitro</i> comparison of human plasma-based and self-assembled tissue-engineered skin substitutes: two different manufacturing processes for the treatment of deep and difficult to heal injuries.

In vitro comparison of human plasma-based and self-assembled tissue-engineered skin substitutes: two different manufacturing processes for the treatment of deep and difficult to heal injuries.

Background: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare side-by-side two models of human bilayered tissue-engineered skin substitutes (hbTESSs) designed for the treatment of severely burned patients. These are the scaffold-free self-assembled skin substitute (SASS) and the human plasma-based skin substitute (HPSS).

Methods: Fibroblasts and keratinocytes from three humans were extracted from skin biopsies (N = 3) and cells from the same donor were used to produce both hbTESS models. For SASS manufacture, keratinocytes were seeded over three self-assembled dermal sheets comprising fibroblasts and the extracellular matrix they produced (n = 12), while for HPSS production, keratinocytes were cultured over hydrogels composed of fibroblasts embedded in either plasma as unique biomaterial (Fibrin), plasma combined with hyaluronic acid (Fibrin-HA) or plasma combined with collagen (Fibrin-Col) (n/biomaterial = 9). The production time was 46-55 days for SASSs and 32-39 days for HPSSs. Substitutes were characterized by histology, mechanical testing, PrestoBlue™-assay, immunofluorescence (Ki67, Keratin (K) 10, K15, K19, Loricrin, type IV collagen) and Western blot (type I and IV collagens).

Results: The SASSs were more resistant to tensile forces (p-value < 0.01) but less elastic (p-value < 0.001) compared to HPSSs. A higher number of proliferative Ki67+ cells were found in SASSs although their metabolic activity was lower. After epidermal differentiation, no significant difference was observed in the expression of K10, K15, K19 and Loricrin. Overall, the production of type I and type IV collagens and the adhesive strength of the dermal-epidermal junction was higher in SASSs.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates, for the first time, that both hbTESS models present similar in vitro biological characteristics. However, mechanical properties differ and future in vivo experiments will aim to compare their wound healing potential.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Burns & Trauma
Burns & Trauma 医学-皮肤病学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
9.40%
发文量
186
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: The first open access journal in the field of burns and trauma injury in the Asia-Pacific region, Burns & Trauma publishes the latest developments in basic, clinical and translational research in the field. With a special focus on prevention, clinical treatment and basic research, the journal welcomes submissions in various aspects of biomaterials, tissue engineering, stem cells, critical care, immunobiology, skin transplantation, and the prevention and regeneration of burns and trauma injuries. With an expert Editorial Board and a team of dedicated scientific editors, the journal enjoys a large readership and is supported by Southwest Hospital, which covers authors'' article processing charges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信