Ravi F Sood1, Lara A Muffley, Max E Seaton, Maricar Ga, Pornthep Sirimahachaiyakul, Anne M Hocking, Nicole S Gibran. 1. Seattle, Wash.; Baltimore, Md.; and Bangkok, Thailand From the Department of Surgery, University of Washington Medicine Regional Burn Center, Harborview Medical Center; the Department of Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine; and the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Vajira Hospital, Navamindradhiraj University.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of hypertrophic scarring is unknown in part because of the lack of a robust animal model. Although the red Duroc pig has emerged as a promising in vivo model, the cellular mechanisms underlying Duroc scarring are unknown, and the size and cost of Duroc pigs are obstacles to their use. Given the central role of the dermal fibroblast in scarring, the authors hypothesized that dermal fibroblasts from the Duroc pig exhibit intrinsic differences in key aspects of the fibroblast response to injury compared with those from the Yorkshire pig, a same-species control that heals normally. METHODS: Duroc and Yorkshire dermal fibroblasts were isolated from uninjured dorsal skin. Actin stress fibers and focal adhesions were visualized by immunocytochemistry and transmission electron microscopy. Cell migration was measured using a scratch wound-closure assay. Contractile function was assessed by collagen gel contraction. Expression of scarring-related genes was determined by quantitative real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, and transforming growth factor (TGF)-β1 protein expression was determined by Western blotting. RESULTS: Duroc dermal fibroblasts display increased adhesion-complex formation, impaired migration, enhanced collagen contraction, and profibrotic gene and protein expression profiles compared with Yorkshire fibroblasts at baseline. In addition, Duroc fibroblasts overexpressed TGF-β1 and were less responsive to exogenous TGF-β1. CONCLUSIONS: Duroc dermal fibroblasts have inherent myofibroblastic differentiation that may account for the pathologic scarring in these animals. The authors' data further validate the Duroc model and support Duroc fibroblast cell culture as a simple, inexpensive, reproducible, and biologically tractable in vitro model for the study of fibroproliferative scarring.
BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of hypertrophic scarring is unknown in part because of the lack of a robust animal model. Although the red Duroc pig has emerged as a promising in vivo model, the cellular mechanisms underlying Duroc scarring are unknown, and the size and cost of Duroc pigs are obstacles to their use. Given the central role of the dermal fibroblast in scarring, the authors hypothesized that dermal fibroblasts from the Duroc pig exhibit intrinsic differences in key aspects of the fibroblast response to injury compared with those from the Yorkshire pig, a same-species control that heals normally. METHODS: Duroc and Yorkshire dermal fibroblasts were isolated from uninjured dorsal skin. Actin stress fibers and focal adhesions were visualized by immunocytochemistry and transmission electron microscopy. Cell migration was measured using a scratch wound-closure assay. Contractile function was assessed by collagen gel contraction. Expression of scarring-related genes was determined by quantitative real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, and transforming growth factor (TGF)-β1 protein expression was determined by Western blotting. RESULTS: Duroc dermal fibroblasts display increased adhesion-complex formation, impaired migration, enhanced collagen contraction, and profibrotic gene and protein expression profiles compared with Yorkshire fibroblasts at baseline. In addition, Duroc fibroblasts overexpressed TGF-β1 and were less responsive to exogenous TGF-β1. CONCLUSIONS: Duroc dermal fibroblasts have inherent myofibroblastic differentiation that may account for the pathologic scarring in these animals. The authors' data further validate the Duroc model and support Duroc fibroblast cell culture as a simple, inexpensive, reproducible, and biologically tractable in vitro model for the study of fibroproliferative scarring.
Authors: James J Tomasek; Giulio Gabbiani; Boris Hinz; Christine Chaponnier; Robert A Brown Journal: Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 94.444
Authors: H P Ehrlich; A Desmoulière; R F Diegelmann; I K Cohen; C C Compton; W L Garner; Y Kapanci; G Gabbiani Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 1994-07 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Ganary Dabiri; David A Tumbarello; Christopher E Turner; Livingston Van de Water Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2008-04-10 Impact factor: 8.551
Authors: Celeste C Finnerty; Marc G Jeschke; Ludwik K Branski; Juan P Barret; Peter Dziewulski; David N Herndon Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-10-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Colton H Funkhouser; Liam D Kirkpatrick; Robert D Smith; Lauren T Moffatt; Jeffrey W Shupp; Bonnie C Carney Journal: Animal Model Exp Med Date: 2021-11-22