4.7 Review

Origins and functions of liver myofibroblasts

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbadis.2013.02.019

Keywords

Myofibroblast; Liver fibrosis; Angiogenesis; Hepatic stellate cell; Portal fibroblast; Ductular reaction

Funding

  1. FRM (Fondation pour la recherche Medicale)
  2. Fonds Cholangite Sclerosante Primitive (CSP)
  3. European Community [HEALTH-F2-2009-241762]
  4. AFEF (Association Francaise pour l'Etude du Foie)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Myofibroblasts combine the matrix-producing functions of fibroblasts and the contractile properties of smooth muscle cells. They are the main effectors of fibrosis in all tissues and make a major contribution to other aspects of the wound healing response, including regeneration and angiogenesis. They display the de novo expression of a-smooth muscle actin. Myofibroblasts, which are absent from the normal liver, are derived from two major sources: hepatic stellate cells (HSCs) and portal mesenchymal cells in the injured liver. Reliable markers for distinguishing between the two subpopulations at the myofibroblast stage are currently lacking, but there is evidence to suggest that both myofibroblast cell types, each exposed to a particular microenvironment (e.g. hypoxia for HSC-MFs, ductular reaction for portal mesenchymal cell-derived myofibroblasts (PMFs)), expand and exert specialist functions, in scarring and inflammation for PMFs, and in vasoregulation and hepatocellular healing for HSC-MFs. Angiogenesis is a major mechanism by which myofibroblasts contribute to the progression of fibrosis in liver disease. It has been clearly demonstrated that liver fibrosis can regress, and this process involves a deactivation of myofibroblasts, although probably not to a fully quiescent phenotype. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Fibrosis: Translation of basic research to human disease. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available