Macrophage phenotype as a predictor of constructive remodeling following the implantation of biologically derived surgical mesh materials - PubMed (original) (raw)
Macrophage phenotype as a predictor of constructive remodeling following the implantation of biologically derived surgical mesh materials
Bryan N Brown et al. Acta Biomater. 2012 Mar.
Erratum in
- Acta Biomater. 2012 Jul;8(7):2871
Abstract
Macrophages have been classified as having plastic phenotypes which exist along a spectrum between M1 (classically activated; pro-inflammatory) and M2 (alternatively activated; regulatory, homeostatic). To date, the effects of polarization towards an M1 or M2 phenotype have been studied largely in the context of response to pathogen or cancer. Recently, M1 and M2 macrophages have been shown to play distinct roles in tissue remodeling following injury. In the present study, the M1/M2 paradigm was utilized to examine the role of macrophages in the remodeling process following implantation of 14 biologically derived surgical mesh materials in the rat abdominal wall. In situ polarization of macrophages responding to the materials was examined and correlated to a quantitative measure of the observed tissue remodeling response to determine whether macrophage polarization is an accurate predictor of the ability of a biologic scaffold to promote constructive tissue remodeling. Additionally the ability of M1 and M2 macrophages to differentially recruit progenitor-like cells in vitro, which are commonly observed to participate in the remodeling of those ECM scaffolds which have a positive clinical outcome, was examined as a possible mechanism underlying the differences in the observed remodeling responses. The results of the present study show that there is a strong correlation between the early macrophage response to implanted materials and the outcome of tissue remodeling. Increased numbers of M2 macrophages and higher ratios of M2:M1 macrophages within the site of remodeling at 14 days were associated with more positive remodeling outcomes (r(2)=0.525-0.686, p<0.05). Further, the results of the present study suggest that the constructive remodeling outcome may be due to the recruitment and survival of different cell populations to the sites of remodeling associated with materials that elicit an M1 vs. M2 response. Both M2 and M0 macrophage conditioned media were shown to have higher chemotactic activities than media conditioned by M1 macrophages (p<0.05). A more thorough understanding of these issues will logically influence the design of next generation biomaterials and the development of regenerative medicine strategies for the formation of functional host tissues.
Copyright © 2011 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Figures
Figure 1
Photomicrographs of hematoxylin and eosin stained slides showing examples of the host remodeling response to test articles in Group 1 (Collamend), Group 2 (InteXen) and Group 3 (MatriStem) at 14 (A) and 35 days (B). Scale bars = 100 μm. Images with higher magnification represent the area within the black box in lower magnification images.
Figure 2
Quantitative histologic scores at 14 days (A) and 35 days (B) post-implantation. Data are presented as the mean for each sample type (n=2). White bars represent materials from Group 1, grey bars represent materials from Group 2, and black bars represent materials from Group 3. Higher scores are more indicative of a constructive remodeling response while low scores are more indicative of a scar tissue or foreign body type response.
Figure 3
Immunofluorescent images showing examples of the host macrophage response to mesh materials from Group 1 (Collamend, A), Group 2 (InteXen, B) and Group 3 (MatriStem, C) at 14 days post implantation. Scale bar = 100 μm. CD68 (pan-macrophage) = red, CCR7 (M1) = orange, CD206 (M2) = green, DRAQ5 (nuclei) = blue.
Figure 4
Average number of macrophages expressing markers indicative of M0, (A,E), M1 (B,F) and M2 (C,G) polarization per high power microscope field as well as the ratio of M2:M1 marker expressing cells (D,H) at 14 days (A–D) and 35 days (E–H). Quantitative results presented as the mean for each sample type (n=2). White bars represent materials from Group 1, grey bars represent materials from Group 2, and black bars represent materials from Group 3.
Figure 5
Photomicrographs showing representative Boyden chamber assay results obtained using M0, M1, and M2 macrophage conditioned media (A). Quantification of C2C12 myoblast migration towards culture supernatants from M0, M1, and M2 macrophages at 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours post-implantation (B). White bar represents migration towards M0 supernatants, grey bar represents migration towards M1 supernatants, and black bar represents migration towards M2 supernatants. Scale bar = 100 μm. * denotes significance as compared to M1 with p<0.05.
Similar articles
- Inhibition of COX1/2 alters the host response and reduces ECM scaffold mediated constructive tissue remodeling in a rodent model of skeletal muscle injury.
Dearth CL, Slivka PF, Stewart SA, Keane TJ, Tay JK, Londono R, Goh Q, Pizza FX, Badylak SF. Dearth CL, et al. Acta Biomater. 2016 Feb;31:50-60. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2015.11.043. Epub 2015 Dec 2. Acta Biomater. 2016. PMID: 26612417 Free PMC article. - Macrophage polarization in response to ECM coated polypropylene mesh.
Wolf MT, Dearth CL, Ranallo CA, LoPresti ST, Carey LE, Daly KA, Brown BN, Badylak SF. Wolf MT, et al. Biomaterials. 2014 Aug;35(25):6838-49. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.04.115. Epub 2014 May 21. Biomaterials. 2014. PMID: 24856104 Free PMC article. - Transcriptomic Regulation of Macrophages by Matrix-Bound Nanovesicle-Associated Interleukin-33.
Cramer M, Pineda Molina C, Hussey G, Turnquist HR, Badylak SF. Cramer M, et al. Tissue Eng Part A. 2022 Oct;28(19-20):867-878. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2022.0006. Epub 2022 Aug 25. Tissue Eng Part A. 2022. PMID: 35770892 Free PMC article. - Macrophage Polarization: Different Gene Signatures in M1(LPS+) vs. Classically and M2(LPS-) vs. Alternatively Activated Macrophages.
Orecchioni M, Ghosheh Y, Pramod AB, Ley K. Orecchioni M, et al. Front Immunol. 2019 May 24;10:1084. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01084. eCollection 2019. Front Immunol. 2019. PMID: 31178859 Free PMC article. Review. - Delivery strategies to control inflammatory response: Modulating M1-M2 polarization in tissue engineering applications.
Alvarez MM, Liu JC, Trujillo-de Santiago G, Cha BH, Vishwakarma A, Ghaemmaghami AM, Khademhosseini A. Alvarez MM, et al. J Control Release. 2016 Oct 28;240:349-363. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.01.026. Epub 2016 Jan 14. J Control Release. 2016. PMID: 26778695 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
- Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Conditioned Media-Loaded Microparticles Enhance Acute Patency in Silk-Based Vascular Grafts.
Lorentz KL, Marini AX, Bruk LA, Gupta P, Mandal BB, DiLeo MV, Weinbaum JS, Little SR, Vorp DA. Lorentz KL, et al. Bioengineering (Basel). 2024 Sep 21;11(9):947. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering11090947. Bioengineering (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39329689 Free PMC article. - Contribution of Tregs to the promotion of constructive remodeling after decellularized extracellular matrix material implantation.
Jiang H, Sun X, Wu Y, Xu J, Xiao C, Liu Q, Fang L, Liang Y, Zhou J, Wu Y, Lin Z. Jiang H, et al. Mater Today Bio. 2024 Jul 9;27:101151. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2024.101151. eCollection 2024 Aug. Mater Today Bio. 2024. PMID: 39104900 Free PMC article. - Direct Current Electrical Stimulation Shifts THP-1-Derived Macrophage Polarization towards Pro-Regenerative M2 Phenotype.
Bianconi S, Leppik L, Oppermann E, Marzi I, Henrich D. Bianconi S, et al. Int J Mol Sci. 2024 Jul 2;25(13):7272. doi: 10.3390/ijms25137272. Int J Mol Sci. 2024. PMID: 39000377 Free PMC article. - A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing short- and medium-term outcomes of novel biologics and lightweight synthetic mesh for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.
Xue P, Yue F, Li S, Cheng W, Zhou H, Yan W, Zhou Y, Tang J, Li J, Zhang J. Xue P, et al. Hernia. 2024 Aug;28(4):1337-1344. doi: 10.1007/s10029-024-03046-4. Epub 2024 Jun 20. Hernia. 2024. PMID: 38902558 Clinical Trial.
References
- Badylak SF. The extracellular matrix as a biologic scaffold material. Biomaterials. 2007 Sep;28(25):3587–3593. - PubMed
- Badylak SF. Xenogeneic extracellular matrix as a scaffold for tissue reconstruction. Transpl Immunol. 2004 Apr;12(3–4):367–377. - PubMed
- Badylak SF, Brown BN, Gilbert TW, Daly KA, Huber A, Turner NJ. Biologic scaffolds for constructive tissue remodeling. Biomaterials. 2011 Jan;32(1):316–319. - PubMed
- Turner NJ, Yates AJ, Jr, Weber DJ, Qureshi IR, Stolz DB, Gilbert TW, et al. Xenogeneic extracellular matrix as an inductive scaffold for regeneration of a functioning musculotendinous junction. Tissue Eng Part A. 2010 Nov;16(11):3309–3317. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources