| Literature DB >> 28639291 |
Marilena Gregorini1,2, Valeria Corradetti1,3, Eleonora Francesca Pattonieri1,3, Chiara Rocca1,2, Samantha Milanesi1, Andrea Peloso4, Silvana Canevari5, Loris De Cecco5, Matteo Dugo5, Maria Antonietta Avanzini6, Melissa Mantelli6, Marcello Maestri3,4, Pasquale Esposito1, Stefania Bruno7, Carmelo Libetta1,2, Antonio Dal Canton1,2, Teresa Rampino1.
Abstract
Kidney donation after circulatory death (DCD) is a less than ideal option to meet organ shortages. Hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) with Belzer solution (BS) improves the viability of DCD kidneys, although the graft clinical course remains critical. Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) promote tissue repair by releasing extracellular vesicles (EV). We evaluated whether delivering MSC-/MSC-derived EV during HMP protects rat DCD kidneys from ischaemic injury and investigated the underlying pathogenic mechanisms. Warm ischaemic isolated kidneys were cold-perfused (4 hrs) with BS, BS supplemented with MSC or EV. Renal damage was evaluated by histology and renal gene expression by microarray analysis, RT-PCR. Malondialdehyde, lactate, LDH, glucose and pyruvate were measured in the effluent fluid. MSC-/EV-treated kidneys showed significantly less global ischaemic damage. In the MSC/EV groups, there was up-regulation of three genes encoding enzymes known to improve cell energy metabolism and three genes encoding proteins involved in ion membrane transport. In the effluent fluid, lactate, LDH, MDA and glucose were significantly lower and pyruvate higher in MSC/EV kidneys as compared with BS, suggesting the larger use of energy substrates by MSC/EV kidneys. The addition of MSC/EV to BS during HMP protects the kidney from ischaemic injury by preserving the enzymatic machinery essential for cell viability and protects the kidney from reperfusion damage.Entities:
Keywords: extracellular vesicles; ischaemic injury; kidney perfusion; microarray analysis; stem cells
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28639291 PMCID: PMC5706569 DOI: 10.1111/jcmm.13249
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cell Mol Med ISSN: 1582-1838 Impact factor: 5.310
Figure 1Rat MSC and EV cytofluorimetric characterization. Panel A. Immunophenotype of one representative expanded rat EGFP‐MSC culture. Representative dot plot of MSC gated by physical parameters and histograms of surface marker expression (grey ispots) and isotypic controls (black ispots). Rat MSC are negative for CD11b and CD45 and positive for CD90, CD49e and CD29. Panel B. Representative dot plot of EV gated by dimension parameters, using 1‐μm calibration beads. Representative histograms of surface marker expression (grey ispots) and isotypic controls (black ispots). Rat EV were positive for CD49e and negative for CD45. Panel C. Representative histograms of specific rat EV markers (continuous line) and isotypic controls (broken line). Rat EV were positive for CD63, CD81 and CD9.
Figure 2Homing tracking of rat EGFP‐MSC. Representative renal section of MSC‐perfused kidneys. EGFP immunohistochemistry showing tubular and vascular localization of MSC. Magnification ×400.
Figure 3Renal lesions evaluated in the DCD model. Formalin‐fixed tissue stained with PAS. Panel A. Tubular epithelial cell flattening (TF). Panel B. Blue arrow indicates brush border loss (BBL), and red arrow indicates bleb formation (BF). Panel C. Yellow arrow indicates tubular lumen obstruction (TO) and white arrow tubular necrosis (TN). Magnification ×400.
Figure 4Ischaemic renal damage in BS and MSC‐/EV‐perfused kidneys. Representative renal sections of kidneys perfused after 20 min. of ischaemia either with Belzer solution (BS) (panel A), or Belzer solution supplemented with 3 million MSC (MSC) (panel B) or Belzer solution supplemented with EV derived from 3 million MSC (EV) (panel C). PAS staining, magnification ×200. Panels D‐I. Boxplots showing the distribution of renal lesions in all groups. Box: median, 25–75° percentile; whiskers, 5–95° percentile. Data are the percentage of tubules/HPF in which the lesions were observed. Panel D. *P < 0.05 versus BS and EV. Panel E. *P < 0.05 versus BS. Panel F. *P < 0.0001 versus BS. Panel G. *P < 0.0001 versus BS. Panel H. *P < 0.0001 versus BS. Panel I. *P < 0.0001 versus BS. TF: tubular epithelial cell flattening, BBL: brush border loss, BF: bleb formation, TO: tubular lumen obstruction, TN: tubular necrosis
Figure 5Microarray gene analysis. Gene expression profiling of kidneys perfused with MSC (MSC) compared with non‐perfused kidneys (NP). Panel A. Volcano plot of log2 fold changes versus –log10 FDR showing transcriptional differences between MSC‐perfused samples and controls. Vertical dashed lines represent the 1.5‐fold change cut‐off, and the horizontal dashed line denotes the 0.05 FDR cut‐off. Panel B. Enrichment map of significantly enriched gene sets at P < 0.001 and FDR < 0.05. Nodes represent gene sets connected by an edge when they share common genes. Node size is proportional to the number of genes in the gene set, and edge thickness is proportional to the overlap between gene sets. Red gene sets are enriched in MSC‐perfused samples, blue gene sets in controls. Highly interconnected gene sets are biologically related and were manually annotated into macro‐categories. Panel C. Heatmap showing the expression of core genes, identified by leading edge analysis of metabolic gene sets, in MSC‐perfused and control samples. Only genes shared by at least two gene sets were selected. Vertical bars are colour‐coded according to gene set clusters in panel B.
Figure 6mRNA expression of cell energy metabolism and membrane transport genes validated by RT‐PCR in BS, MSC and EV groups. Columns show gene mRNA expression normalized to beta‐actin expression and converted to fold change. Data are means ± S.D. The groups are defined in Figure 4. Panel A. Isocitrate dehydrogenase 2 (Idh2) mRNA expression (°P < 0.005 versus BS; *P < 0.05 versus EV and BS). Panel B. NADH dehydrogenase (ubiquinone), Fe‐S protein 8 (Ndufs8) mRNA expression (°P < 0.005 versus BS; *P < 0.05 versus BS). Panel C. Pyruvate dehydrogenase beta (Pdhb) mRNA expression (*P < 0.05 versus BS; °P < 0.01 versus BS). Panel D. Calbindin1 (Calb1) mRNA expression (°P < 0.05 versus BS). Panel E. Monocarboxylate transporter 1 (Slc16a1) mRNA expression (°P < 0.05 versus BS and MSC). Panel F. Vacuolar H + ‐ATPase d2 Subunit (Atp6v0d2) mRNA expression (°P < 0.01 versus BS and MSC).
Figure 7Markers of ischaemic damage and energy substrates in effluent fluid. Columns show levels of lactate (mg/dl), LDH (mU/ml), malondialdehyde (MDA) (mcU/ml), glucose (mg/dl) and pyruvate (mg/dl) in effluent fluid from each group. Data are means ± S.D. The groups are defined in Figure 4. Panel A. *P < 0.05 versus BS. Panel B. *P < 0.05 versus BS. Panel C. *P < 0.05 versus BS; °P < 0.01 versus MSC. Panel D. *P < 0.05 versus BS. Panel E *P < 0.05 versus BS; °P < 0.005 versus BS.
Figure 8Schematic representation of cell energy metabolism pathways and ion membrane transporters up‐regulated in MSC/EV groups.