First- vs. Second-Generation Autologous Platelet Concentrates and Their Implications for Wound Healing: Differences in Proteome and Secretome

Le résumé fourni par la source

Differences in cell count and growth factor expression between first- and second-generation autologous platelet concentrates (APCs) have been well described. The debate over which formula best supports wound healing in various surgical procedures is still ongoing. This study aims to assess the whole proteome assembly, cell content, immunological potential and pro-angiogenic potential of second-generation APC, Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) vs. first-generation APC, Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP). The global proteome of the APCs was analyzed using nano-liquid chromatography mass spectrometry. Blood cell concentrations were determined by an automated cell counter. The effect of APCs on macrophage polarization was analyzed by flow cytometry. A yolk sac membrane (YSM) assay was used to monitor the neo-vessel formation and capillary branching in vivo. Cell count analysis revealed a higher number/concentration of leukocytes in PRF vs. PRP. Incubation of macrophages with PRP or platelet-free plasma (PFP) did not induce a significant pro-inflammatory state but led to a shift to the M0/M2 phenotype as seen in wound healing for all tested formulas. Label-free proteomics analysis identified a total of 387 proteins from three biological replicates of the respective designated groups. PRF induced increased formation of neo-vessels and branching points in vivo in comparison to PRP and PFP (each p < 0.001), indicating the enhanced pro-angiogenic potential of PRF. Overall, PRF seems superior to PRP, an important representative of first-generation formulas. Inclusion of leucocytes in PRF compared to PRP suggested rather an anti-inflammatory effect on macrophages. These results are important to support the versatile clinical applications in regenerative medicine for second-generation autologous platelet concentrates to optimize wound healing.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.