It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Diabetic foot ulcers are a major health care concern with limited effective therapies. Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)‐based therapies are promising treatment options due to their beneficial effects of immunomodulation, angiogenesis, and other paracrine effects. We investigated whether a bioengineered scaffold device containing hypoxia‐preconditioned, allogeneic human MSCs combined with the beta‐adrenergic antagonist timolol could improve impaired wound healing in diabetic mice. Different iterations were tested to optimize the primary wound outcome, which was percent of wound epithelialization. MSC preconditioned in 1 μM timolol at 1% oxygen (hypoxia) seeded at a density of 2.5 × 105 cells/cm2 on Integra Matrix Wound Scaffold (MSC/T/H/S) applied to wounds and combined with daily topical timolol applications at 2.9 mM resulted in optimal wound epithelialization 65.6% (24.9% ± 13.0% with MSC/T/H/S vs 41.2% ± 20.1%, in control). Systemic absorption of timolol was below the HPLC limit of quantification, suggesting that with the 7‐day treatment, accumulative steady‐state timolol concentration is minimal. In the early inflammation stage of healing, the MSC/T/H/S treatment increased CCL2 expression, lowered the pro‐inflammatory cytokines IL‐1B and IL6 levels, decreased neutrophils by 44.8%, and shifted the macrophage ratio of M2/M1 to 1.9 in the wound, demonstrating an anti‐inflammatory benefit. Importantly, expression of the endothelial marker CD31 was increased by 2.5‐fold with this treatment. Overall, the combination device successfully improved wound healing and reduced the wound inflammatory response in the diabetic mouse model, suggesting that it could be translated to a therapy for patients with diabetic chronic wounds.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details



1 Department of Dermatology, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA
2 Department of Cell Biology and Human Anatomy, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA; Stem Cell Program, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, USA
3 Department of Dermatology, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA; Institute for Pediatric Regenerative Medicine, Shriners Hospital for Children Northern California, Sacramento, California, USA
4 Department of Biological Sciences, California State University, Sacramento, Sacramento, California, USA
5 Stem Cell Program, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, USA
6 Department of Dermatology, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA; Dermatology Section, VA Northern California Health Care System, Mather, California, USA