In vivo observations of cell trafficking in allotransplanted vascularized skin flaps and conventional skin grafts.
In vivo observations of cell trafficking in allotransplanted vascularized skin flaps and conventional skin grafts.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.bjps.2009.01.036
复制
发表时间：
2010-04
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Butler PE
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Horner BM;Ferguson KK;Randolph MA;Spencer JA;Carlson AL;Hirsh EL;Lin CP;Butler PE
同种异体皮肤排斥反应是限制复合组织同种异体移植（CTA）广泛应用的主要因素。以前的研究检查皮肤排斥反应主要是研究排斥反应的传统皮肤移植（CSG）使用标准的组织学技术。本研究的目的是客观地评估是否有在复合组织同种异体移植（SCTT）中使用体内技术的CSG和主要血管化皮肤的免疫反应的差异，以获得新的见解，以皮肤同种异体移植的免疫反应。将标准刘易斯（LEW）和Wistar Furth（WF）的CSG和SCTT移植到受体转基因绿色荧光刘易斯大鼠（LEW-GFP）。体内共聚焦显微镜用于观察移植物皮肤内的细胞运输。此外，对皮肤活检进行免疫组织化学染色，以揭示II类主要组织相容性抗原的可能表达。与CSG相比，在对SCTT的免疫应答中观察到差异。SCTT具有比CSG更大密度的细胞浸润（p < 0.03），其更集中在移植物的中心（p < 0.05）而不是边缘，这可能是由于皮肤的直接血管化。树突状细胞仅在排斥SCTT中观察到，而不是CSG。此外，真皮内皮II类MHC表达仅在同种异体SCTT中观察到。SCTT和CSG中的免疫应答都集中在真皮中的靶标上，在同种异体移植物中，浸润细胞聚集在毛囊（CSG和SCTT; p < 0.01）和血管（SCTT; p < 0.01）周围。本研究表明，SCTT和CSG的排斥反应之间存在显著差异，这可能限制了应用于复合组织同种异体移植时皮肤移植物排斥反应的许多历史数据的相关性。此外，新的体内技术的使用确定了以前没有描述过的同种异体皮肤的免疫应答特征，这可能有助于指导未来克服同种异体皮肤排斥反应的方法。
The problem of allogeneic skin rejection is a major limitation to more widespread application of clinical composite tissue allotransplantation (CTA). Previous research examining skin rejection has mainly studied rejection of conventional skin grafts (CSG) using standard histological techniques. The aim of this study was to objectively assess if there were differences in the immune response to CSG and primarily vascularized skin in composite tissue allotransplants (SCTT) using in vivo techniques in order to gain new insights in to the immune response to skin allotransplants. CSG and SCTT were transplanted from standard Lewis (LEW) ad Wistar Furth (WF) to recipient transgenic green fluorescent Lewis rats (LEW–GFP). In vivo confocal microscopy was used to observe cell trafficking within skin of the transplants. In addition, immunohistochemical staining was performed on skin biopsies to reveal possible expression of class II major histocompatibility antigens. A difference was observed in the immune response to SCTT compared to CSG. SCTT had a greater density cellular infiltrate than CSG (p < 0.03) that was focused more at the center of the transplant (p < 0.05) than at the edges, likely due to the immediate vascularization of the skin. Recipient dendritic cells were only observed in rejecting SCTT, not CSG. Furthermore, dermal endothelial class II MHC expression was only observed in allogeneic SCTT. The immune response in both SCTT and CSG was focused on targets in the dermis, with infiltrating cells clustering around hair follicles (CSG and SCTT; p < 0.01) and blood vessels (SCTT; p < 0.01) in allogeneic transplants. This study suggests that there are significant differences between rejection of SCTT and CSG that may limit the relevance of much of the historical data on skin graft rejection when applied to composite tissue allotransplantation. Furthermore, the use of novel in vivo techniques identified characteristics of the immune response to allograft skin not previously described, which may be useful in directing future approaches to overcoming allograft skin rejection.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.5
作者：
Lanzetta, Marco;Petruzzo, Palmina;Zhang, Xinying
通讯作者：
Zhang, Xinying
DOI：
10.1111/j.1749-6632.1962.tb45335.x
发表时间：
1962-01-01
期刊：
ANNALS OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES-SERIES
影响因子：
--
作者：
SILVERMAN, MS;CHIN, PH
通讯作者：
CHIN, PH
影响因子：
6.5
作者：
DVORAK, HF;MIHM, MC;GALLI, SJ
通讯作者：
GALLI, SJ
影响因子：
3.6
作者：
Jiang, Hui Q.;Wang, Yong;Li, Jie S.
通讯作者：
Li, Jie S.
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
WANG, Y;CALDER, VL;GREENWOOD, J
通讯作者：
GREENWOOD, J