4.7 Article

A Modified Collagen Dressing Induces Transition of Inflammatory to Reparative Phenotype of Wound Macrophages

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-49435-z

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [GM077185, GM069589, NR013898, NR015676, DK114718, DK076566]
  2. Southwest Technologies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Collagen containing wound-care dressings are extensively used. However, the mechanism of action of these dressings remain unclear. Earlier studies utilizing a modified collagen gel (MCG) dressing demonstrated improved vascularization of ischemic wounds and better healing outcomes. Wound macrophages are pivotal in facilitating wound angiogenesis and timely healing. The current study was designed to investigate the effect of MCG on wound macrophage phenotype and function. MCG augmented recruitment of macrophage at the wound-site, attenuated pro-inflammatory and promoted anti-inflammatory macrophage polarization. Additionally, MCG increased anti-inflammatory IL-10, IL-4 and pro-angiogenicVEGF production, indicating a direct role of MCG in resolving wound inflammation and improving angiogenesis. At the wound-site, impairment in clearance of apoptotic cell bioburden enables chronic inflammation. Engulfment of apoptotic cells by macrophages (efferocytosis) resolves inflammation via a miR-21-PDCD4-IL-10 pathway. MCG-treated wound macrophages exhibited a significantly bolstered efferocytosis index. Such favorable outcome significantly induced miR-21 expression. MCG-mediated IL-10 production was dampened under conditions of miR-21 knockdown pointing towards miR-21 as a causative factor. Pharmacological inhibition of JNK attenuated IL-10 production by MCG, implicating miR-21-JNK pathway in MCG-mediated IL-10 production by macrophages. This work provides direct evidence demonstrating that a collagen-based wound-care dressing may influence wound macrophage function and therefore modify wound inflammation outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据