0 Shiota 2010
0 Shiota 2010
0 Shiota 2010
Role of Mast Cells in Wound Healing Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2010;151:80–88 81
20 NS +/+
W/WV
NS
100 NS
15
Re-epithelialization (%)
Fig. 1. Closure and re-epithelialization of 10
the scald wounds of +/+ mice and W/W V
mice. Wound size (a) and the percentage 50
of wound re-epithelialization (b) of scald
NS
wounds in +/+ mice and W/W V mice were 5
calculated at 3, 7, 14 and 21 days after scald NS
injury. There were no statistically signifi- NS
cant between-group differences in the ex- NS
tent of wound closure and re-epithelializa- 0 0
tion during the experiment. Results are 3 7 14 21 3 7 14 21
shown as the mean 8 SEM (n = 6 for each a Days b Days
time point). NS = Not significant.
Angiogenesis
Vessel regeneration was observed at the wound edge
in both groups by day 7. The number of vessels at the
wound edge peaked in +/+ mice at day 14 and then de-
creased significantly at day 21, while it increased con-
tinuously in W/W V mice until the end of experiment
at day 21. This number was higher in +/+ mice than in
W/W V mice at day 7, but lower in +/+ mice than in
W/W V mice at day 21 (fig. 4a). At the wound center, the b
number peaked in +/+ mice at day 14 and then de-
creased significantly at day 21, but in W/W V mice, the
number continued to increase up to day 21. The num-
ber of vessels at the wound center was higher at day 14
but lower at day 21 in +/+ mice than in W/W V mice
(fig. 4b). In both groups, angiogenesis took place during
the proliferative phase, but to a lesser extent in W/W V
mice than in +/+ mice at days 7 and 14. Furthermore,
vascular regression took place in the late remodeling
phase at day 21 in normal +/+ mice but was not ob-
served in W/W V mice.
Role of Mast Cells in Wound Healing Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2010;151:80–88 83
1.0 +/+ 80
W/WV b b
Fig. 3. Dermal thickness and fibrotic area b
a
b
300 +/+ 300
b
W/WV
a
b b
b
Fig. 4. The number of vessels at the edge a
a
200 NS 200
and center of scald wounds in +/+ mice b
and W/W V mice. The number of vessels at a
a
the edge (a) and center (b) of scald wounds a
in +/+ mice and W/W V mice was mea- a a
sured before (no injury) and after scald in- NS a
jury. Angiogenesis was retarded and vas- 100 100
cular regression was not observed in the NS NS
wound tissues of W/W V mice. Results are
shown as the mean 8 SEM (n = 6 for each
time point). a p ! 0.05, injured vs. unin-
jured normal (no injury) skin tissues with- 0 0
in the same mouse strain. b p ! 0.05, +/+ No injury 3 7 14 21 No injury 3 7 14 21
mice vs. W/W V mice. NS = Not signifi- a Days b Days
cant.
after scald injury. However, there was no difference in re- and ␣2-macroglobulin in interstitial fluid strongly inhib-
epithelialization between normal +/+ mice and W/W V it chymase [19, 20]. Chymase released from degranulated
mice. Another study using W/WV mice also found mast mast cells may be suppressed by natural protease inhibi-
cells played no role in re-epithelialization after excisional tors. Because chymase is an important inhibitory factor
skin injury [5]. The precise reason is unclear why mast for re-epithelialization [18], inhibition of chymase activ-
cells may not have major role on the physiological re-ep- ity early in the wound healing process may favor initia-
ithelialization process, but the substantial suppression of tion of re-epithelialization. Actually, re-epithelialization
chymase activity within the wound of +/+ mice at days 3 in +/+ mice after scald injury started within 3 days, and
and 7 may partly explain the reason. The wound region was not delayed compared with that in W/W V mice. Oth-
became edematous immediately after scald injury and er mediators may also be released into the wound regions
filled with interstitial fluid containing a variety of natu- immediately after scald wounding; however, their role on
ral protease inhibitors. Especially, ␣1-antichymotrypsin re-epithelialization was not determined.
150 +/+ 40
Fig. 6. The number of mast cells at the edge W/WV b
and chymase activity of skin tissues in +/+
Mast cells at edge of scald wound (mm–2)
a
mice and W/W V mice. The number of Chymase activity (mU/mg protein)
mast cells at the wound edge (a) and chy- b
30 b
mase activity (b) in the skin tissues of +/+ a
100
mice and W/W V were measured before (no b
injury) and after scald injury. The number b
of mast cells increased dramatically at the b 20
wound edge in +/+ mice (a). Chymase ac- a
tivity in the skin tissues of +/+ mice was b
decreased significantly 3 and 7 days after 50
b a
injury, and then recovered to the pre- b 10
injury level at 14 and continued to in- b a
crease at 21 days (b). Results are shown as a
the mean 8 SEM (n = 6 for each time
point). a p ! 0.05, injured vs. uninjured 0 0
normal (no-injury) skin tissues within the No injury 3 7 14 21 No injury 3 7 14 21
same strain of mice. b p ! 0.05, +/+ mice vs. a Days b Days
W/W V mice.
In our study, although wound closure and re-epitheli- suggest that mast cells may contribute to wound healing
alization were not significantly different between W/WV during the proliferative phase. However, previous reports
mice and +/+ mice, stronger fibrous proliferation occurred suggested that mast cells were superfluous during prolif-
at the wound edge in +/+ mice than in W/WV mice. Impor- eration after excisional skin injury [5, 10]. This discrep-
tantly, the number of mast cells increased markedly at the ancy may be due to the difference in the methods used for
wound edge in +/+ mice during the proliferative phase. The inducing skin injury. Another study showed that re-epithe-
proliferative response and increase of mast cell number oc- lialization speed was slower and fibroblastic proliferation
curred in the same area at the same time. These results amount was greater for scald wounds than excisional
Role of Mast Cells in Wound Healing Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2010;151:80–88 85
Color version available online
a b
c d
e f
wounds [21]. Healing after scald injury is a more compli- at day 7, and continued to increase markedly at days 14 and
cated and prolonged process than that after excisional or 21. Although the precise mechanism is unclear, recruit-
incisional injury. Importantly, the number of mast cells in ment of mast cell progenitors into the injured regions and/
surgically injured skin has been found to decrease in the or local proliferation of mast cells may be more strongly
early phase and then recover without increasing further in activated in the late phase of wound healing after scald in-
the late phase of wound healing [4, 12]. In our present study, jury than that after uncomplicated surgical injury.
the number of mast cells at wound edge in normal +/+ mice Mast cells produce various profibrotic factors includ-
was also decreased at day 3, but exceeded the control level ing TGF-1. TGF-1 is a multifunctional growth factor
Role of Mast Cells in Wound Healing Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2010;151:80–88 87
Interestingly, wound closure was completed within 3 Acknowledgment
weeks, whereas the number of mast cells in injured skin
The authors would like to thank Dr. G.H. Caughey, University
was continuously increased in +/+ mice. Further studies of California, San Francisco for kindly providing the antibody
in the late remodeling phase after wound closure are war- against chymase.
ranted to clarify whether the observed impairment in
mast cell-deficient mice is transient or affects the general
quality of the healed wounds.
References
1 Eming SA, Krieg T, Davidson JM: Inflam- promotion of matrix remodeling in burn by transforming growth factor-beta. Science
mation in wound repair: molecular and cel- wound healing in mice: relevance of chymase. 1987;237:1333–1336.
lular mechanisms. J Invest Dermatol 2007; Arch Dermatol Res 1998;290:553–560. 25 Shah M, Foreman DM, Ferguson MW: Neu-
127:514–525. 14 Fang KC, Wolters PJ, Steinhoff M, Bidgol A, tralising antibody to TGF-beta 1,2 reduces
2 Martin P, Leibovich SJ: Inflammatory cells Blount JL, Caughey GH: Mast cell expression cutaneous scarring in adult rodents. J Cell
during wound repair: the good, the bad and of gelatinases A and B is regulated by kit li- Sci 1994;107:1137–1157.
the ugly. Trends Cell Biol 2005; 15:599–607. gand and TGF-beta. J Immunol 1999; 162: 26 Brown RL, Ormsby I, Doetschman TC,
3 El Sayed SO, Dyson M: Responses of dermal 5528–5535. Greenhalgh DG: Wound healing in the
mast cells to injury. J Anat 1993; 182: 369– 15 Symington FW: Lymphotoxin, tumor necro- transforming growth factor-beta-deficient
376. sis factor, and gamma interferon are cyto- mouse. Wound Repair Regen 1995;3:25–36.
4 Hebda PA, Collins MA, Tharp MD: Mast cell static for normal human keratinocytes. J In- 27 Taipale J, Lohi J, Saarinen J, Kovanen PT,
and myofibroblast in wound healing. Der- vest Dermatol 1989; 92:798–805. Keski-Oja J: Human mast cell chymase and
matol Clin 1993;11:685–696. 16 Pillai S, Gilliam L, Conrad HE, Holleran leukocyte elastase release latent transform-
5 Egozi EI, Ferreira AM, Burns AL, Gamelli WM: Heparin and its non-anticoagulant an- ing growth factor-ß1 from the extracellular
RL, Dipietro LA: Mast cells modulate the alogues inhibit human keratinocyte growth matrix of cultured human epithelial and en-
inflammatory but not the proliferative re- without inducing differentiation. J Invest dothelial cells. J Biol Chem 1995; 270: 4689–
sponse in healing wounds. Wound Repair Dermatol 1994;103:647–650. 4696.
Regen 2003;11:46–54. 17 Huttunen M, Hyttinen M, Nilsson G, But- 28 Lindstedt KA, Wang Y, Shiota N, Saarinen J,
6 Weller K, Foitzik K, Paus R, Syska W, Mau- terfield JH, Horsmanheimo M, Harvima IT: Hyytiainen M, Kokkonen JO, Keski-Oja J,
rer M: Mast cells are required for normal Inhibition of keratinocyte growth in cell Kovanen PT: Activation of paracrine TGF-
healing of skin wounds in mice. FASEB J culture and whole skin culture by mast cell beta1 signaling upon stimulation and de-
2006;20:2366–2368. mediators. Exp Dermatol 2001;10:184–192. granulation of rat serosal mast cells: a novel
7 Shiota N, Kakizoe E, Shimoura K, Tanaka T, 18 Huttunen M, Harvima IT: Mast cell tryptase function for chymase. FASEB J 2001; 15:
Okunishi H: Effect of mast cell chymase in- and chymase in chronic leg ulcers: chymase 1377–1388.
hibitor on the development of scleroderma in is potentially destructive to epithelium and 29 Moulin V: Growth factors in skin wound
tight-skin mice. Br J Pharmacol 2005; 145: is controlled by proteinase inhibitors. Br J healing. Eur J Cell Biol 1995; 68:1–7.
424–431. Dermatol 2005;152:1149–1160. 30 Hiromatsu Y, Toda S: Mast cells and angio-
8 Yoshida S, Flancbaum L, Fitzpatrick JC, Berg 19 Schechter NM, Sprows JL, Schoenberger OL, genesis. Microsc Res Tech 2003;60:64–69.
RA, Fisher H: Effects of compound 48/80 Lazarus GS, Cooperman BS, Rubin H: Reac- 31 Noli C, Miolo A: The mast cell in wound
and exogenous histamine on wound healing tion of human skin chymotrypsin-like pro- healing. Vet Dermatol 2001;12:303–313.
in mice. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1989;191:90– teinase chymase with plasma proteinase 32 Bertolino P, Deckers M, Lebrin F, ten Dijke
92. inhibitors. J Biol Chem 1989; 264: 21308– P: Transforming growth factor-beta signal
9 Bairy KL, Rao CM, Ramesh KV, Kulkarni 21315. transduction in angiogenesis and vascular
DR: Effect of histamine on wound healing. 20 Walter M, Sutton RM, Schechter NM: High- disorders. Chest 2005; 128(6 suppl):585S–
Indian J Physiol Pharmacol 1991; 35: 180– ly efficient inhibition of human chymase by 590S.
182. alpha(2)-macroglobulin. Arch Biochem Bio- 33 Galli SJ, Tsai M: Mast cells: versatile regula-
10 Iba Y, Shibata A, Kato M, Masukawa T: Pos- phys 1999;368:276–284. tors of inflammation, tissue remodeling,
sible involvement of mast cells in collagen 21 Schaffer CJ, Reinisch L, Polis SL, Stricklin host defense and homeostasis. J Dermatol
remodeling in the late phase of cutaneous GP: Comparisons of wound healing among Sci 2008;49:7–19.
wound healing in mice. Int Immunophar- excisional, laser-created, and standard ther- 34 Peters EM, Maurer M, Botchkarev VA, Jen-
macol 2004;4:1873–1880. mal burns in porcine wounds of equal depth. sen K, Welker P, Scott GA, Paus R: Kit is ex-
11 Galiano RD, Michaels J, Dobryansky M, Wound Repair Regen 1997;5:52–61. pressed by epithelial cells in vivo. J Invest
Levine JP, Gurtner GC: Quantitative and 22 Werner S, Grose R: Regulation of wound Dermatol 2003;121:976–984.
reproducible murine model of excisional healing by growth factors and cytokines. 35 Grimbaldeston MA, Chen CC, Piliponsky
wound healing. Wound Repair Regen 2004; Physiol Rev 2003;83:835–870. AM, Tsai M, Tam SY, Galli SJ: Mast cell-defi-
12:485–492. 23 Beanes SR, Dang C, Soo C, Ting K: Skin re- cient W-sash c-kit mutant Kit W-sh/W-sh
12 Persinger MA, Lepage P, Simard JP, Parker pair and scar formation: the central role of mice as a model for investigating mast cell bi-
GH: Mast cell numbers in incisional wounds TGF-beta. Expert Rev Mol Med 2003; 5: 1– ology in vivo. Am J Pathol 2005;167:835–848.
in rat skin as a function of distance, time and 22. 36 Zhou JS, Xing W, Friend DS, Austen KF, Katz
treatment. Br J Dermatol 1983; 108:179–187. 24 Mustoe TA, Pierce GF, Thomason A, Gra- HR: Mast cell deficiency in Kit(W-sh) mice
13 Nishikori Y, Kakizoe E, Kobayashi Y, Shi- mates P, Sporn MB, Deuel TF: Accelerated does not impair antibody-mediated arthri-
moura K, Okunishi H, Dekio S: Skin mast cell healing of incisional wounds in rats induced tis. J Exp Med 2007;204:2797–2802.