Aims
This study sought to confirm the difference of the wound-healing effect, cell survival, and immune response between autologous fibroblast sheets and allogeneic fibroblast sheets.
Background/aims
This study sought to confirm the difference of the wound-healing effect, cell survival, and immune response between autologous fibroblast sheets and allogeneic fibroblast sheets.
Conclusion
The allogeneic fibroblast sheets showed comparable rates of cell survival and wound-healing effects to those of the autologous fibroblast sheets, despite the subsequent immunogenic response. This result supports the potential practical clinical application of scaffold-free allogeneic fibroblast sheets based on the paracrine effect.
Methods
Regarding wound healing, autologous or allogeneic fibroblast sheets were transplanted onto a mouse cutaneous wound healing model and the wound contraction rate was evaluated. The luciferase-expressing fibroblast sheet was prepared and the survival of the cell sheet was evaluated by IVIS® after autologous or allogeneic transplantation. Histological evaluation was performed at five and 14 days after transplantation.
Results
Allogeneic fibroblast-sheet transplantation showed significant wound contraction at the early phase of wound healing, which was equivalent to that seen with the autologous fibroblast sheets. Luminescence of the autologous and allogeneic luciferase-expressing fibroblast sheets peaked on Day 5, and no luminescence was observed on Day 13. In the allogeneic fibroblast-sheet transplant group, a significant accumulation of immune cells was observed in the healed tissue but not in the early stage of wound healing.