FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Vet Surg / Preliminary in vivo investigation of the mesenchymal stromal...
Veterinary surgery : VS2024; 53(8); 1377-1389; doi: 10.1111/vsu.14170

Preliminary in vivo investigation of the mesenchymal stromal cell secretome as a novel treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in equine skin wounds.

Abstract: We aimed to study the antimicrobial and pro-healing potential of equine mesenchymal stromal cell secreted products (i.e. secretome), collected as conditioned media (mesenchymal stromal cell-conditioned media, MSC CM), in a novel in vivo model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-inoculated equine thorax wounds. Methods: Prospective in vivo study. Methods: Two Thoroughbred geldings. Methods: Six full-thickness cutaneous wounds were created bilaterally on the dorsal thorax of two horses (n = 12 wounds/horse). Wounds on the left thoraces were inoculated with MRSA on day 0. All wounds were then treated with either mupirocin ointment, MSC CM, or vehicle control (n = 4 wounds per group) once daily for 3 days. Photographs were taken to quantify wound scores and sizes, as well as samples to determine bacterial colony forming units (CFUs), at days 0, 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28. The wound edge was biopsied on days 0, 7, and 28, and scored histologically. Results: Inoculated wounds had more bacterial CFUs at day 1 (p < .0001) and were larger in size at day 28 (p = .0009) than noninoculated wounds. Mupirocin-treated wounds were smaller than MSC CM and vehicle control-treated wounds at day 28 (p = .003). Mesenchymal stromal cell-conditioned media did not affect CFU numbers in inoculated and noninoculated wounds. Moreover, MSC CM did not affect the parameters of wound size or gross or microscopic wound scores over time. Conclusions: Mesenchymal stromal cell-conditioned media did not exhibit antimicrobial or pro-healing properties in the current study; however, the in vivo model of inoculated equine thorax wounds requires further optimization. Conclusions: This pilot study contributes to a growing understanding of the equine MSC secretome as an antimicrobial and pro-healing therapeutic for equine wounds.
© 2024 The Author(s). Veterinary Surgery published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Veterinary Surgeons.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2024-10-05 PubMed ID: 39367671DOI: 10.1111/vsu.14170Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research investigates the potential benefits of using molecules (secretome) produced by equine (horse) mesenchymal stromal cells in treating skin wounds on horses infected with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). However, the study didn’t find any significant beneficial antimicrobial or wound-healing effect from the use of the secretome.

Methodology

  • The researchers created six full-thickness skin wounds on each side of two Thoroughbred geldings (male horses).
  • Left side wounds were inoculated with MRSA, a bacterium which is resistant to many antibiotics.
  • All wounds, whether infected or not, were treated daily for three days either with mupirocin (an antibiotic) ointment, mesenchymal stromal cell-conditioned media (MSC CM, which carries the secreted products or secretomes), or a control treatment.
  • Wounds’ progress was monitored by photographing and measuring the wound sizes to determine wound scores. Additionally, bacterial colony forming units (CFUs) were counted on specific days (0, 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28).
  • Biopsies were taken from the wound edges on days 0, 7, and 28, for histological scoring (examining under a microscope).

Findings

  • At the first day of treatment, the MRSA-inoculated wounds had more bacterial CFUs than the non-inoculated ones.
  • By the 28th day, inoculated wounds were larger in size than non-inoculated wounds.
  • Wounds treated with mupirocin were smaller than those treated with MSC CM or the control treatment at day 28.
  • MSC CM did not influence CFU numbers either in inoculated or non-inoculated wounds.
  • No significant effects on wound size or gross or microscopic wound scores were found from MSC CM over time.

Conclusions

  • The use of MSC CM didn’t show any antimicrobial or pro-healing properties in this study.
  • The researchers suggested that their in vivo model (using live horses) of inoculated thorax wounds might need optimization.
  • The study expands understanding of the potential role of equine MSC secretome in wound healing and antibacterial therapies, albeit with non-significant findings in this study.

Cite This Article

APA
Fahey MJ, Harman RM, Thomas MA, Pugliese BR, Peters-Kennedy J, Delco ML, Van de Walle GR. (2024). Preliminary in vivo investigation of the mesenchymal stromal cell secretome as a novel treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in equine skin wounds. Vet Surg, 53(8), 1377-1389. https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.14170

Publication

Veterinary surgery : VS
ISSN: 1532-950X
NlmUniqueID: 8113214
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 53
Issue: 8
Pages: 1377-1389

Researcher Affiliations

Fahey, Megan J
  • Baker Institute for Animal Health, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Harman, Rebecca M
  • Baker Institute for Animal Health, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Thomas, Matthew A
  • College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Cornell University, New York, USA.
Pugliese, Brenna R
  • College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Cornell University, New York, USA.
Peters-Kennedy, Jeanine
  • College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, Cornell University, New York, USA.
Delco, Michelle L
  • College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Cornell University, New York, USA.
Van de Walle, Gerlinde R
  • Baker Institute for Animal Health, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Horses
  • Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus / drug effects
  • Mesenchymal Stem Cells
  • Staphylococcal Infections / veterinary
  • Staphylococcal Infections / drug therapy
  • Anti-Bacterial Agents / therapeutic use
  • Anti-Bacterial Agents / pharmacology
  • Male
  • Horse Diseases / therapy
  • Horse Diseases / microbiology
  • Horse Diseases / drug therapy
  • Wound Healing / drug effects
  • Secretome
  • Mupirocin / pharmacology
  • Mupirocin / therapeutic use
  • Prospective Studies
  • Culture Media, Conditioned / pharmacology
  • Skin / microbiology
  • Skin / injuries

Grant Funding

  • 2022-67015-36351 / National Institute of Food and Agriculture

References

This article includes 44 references
  1. Bowden A, Boynova P, Brennan ML. Retrospective case series to identify the most common conditions seen “out‐of‐hours” by first‐opinion equine veterinary practitioners.. Vet Rec 2020;187(10):404.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.105880google scholar: lookup
  2. Gehlen H, Klein KS, Merle R, Lübke‐Becker A, Stoeckle SD. Does colonization with MRSA, ESBL – producing Enterobacteriaceae, and/or Acinetobacter baumannii – increase the risk for postoperative surgical site infection?. Vet Med Sci 2023;9(2):729‐737.
    doi: 10.1002/vms3.1073google scholar: lookup
  3. Lehenbauer TW, Smith DR, Fajt VR. AVMA/Committee on Antimicrobials: Antimicrobial Resistant Pathogens Affecting Animal Health in the United States.. 2020.
  4. Khairullah AR, Sudjarwo SA, Effendi MH, Ramandinianto SC, Widodo A, Riwu KHP. A review of horses as a source of spreading livestock‐associated methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus to human health.. Vet World 2022;15(8):1906‐1915.
    doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2022.1906‐1915google scholar: lookup
  5. Harman RM, Rajesh A, Van de Walle GR. Use of biologics and stem cells for wound healing in the horse.. Vet Clin North Am ‐ Equine Pract 2023;39(3):525‐539.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2023.06.003google scholar: lookup
  6. Md Fadilah NI, Mohd Abdul Kader Jailani MS, Badrul Hisham MAI. Cell secretomes for wound healing and tissue regeneration: Nextgeneration acellular based tissue engineered products.. J Tissue Eng 2022;13:13.
    doi: 10.1177/20417314221114273google scholar: lookup
  7. Harman RM, Yang S, He MK, Van De Walle GR. Antimicrobial peptides secreted by equine mesenchymal stromal cells inhibit the growth of bacteria commonly found in skin wounds.. Stem Cell Res Ther 2017;8(1):1‐14.
    doi: 10.1186/s13287‐017‐0610‐6google scholar: lookup
  8. Bussche L, Harman RM, Syracuse BA. Microencapsulated equine mesenchymal stromal cells promote cutaneous wound healing in vitro.. Stem Cell Res Ther 2015;6(1):66.
    doi: 10.1186/s13287‐015‐0037‐xgoogle scholar: lookup
  9. Caruso M, Shuttle S, Amelse L, Elkhenany H, Schumacher J, Dhar MS. A pilot study to demonstrate the paracrine effect of equine, adult allogenic mesenchymal stem cells in vitro, with a potential for healing of experimentally‐created, equine thoracic wounds in vivo.. Front Vet Sci 2022;9:1011905.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.1011905google scholar: lookup
  10. Di Francesco P, Cajon P, Desterke C. Effect of allogeneic oral mucosa mesenchymal stromal cells on equine wound repair.. Vet Med Int 2021;2021:5024905.
    doi: 10.1155/2021/5024905google scholar: lookup
  11. Harman RM, Bihun IV, Van de Walle GR. Secreted factors from equine mesenchymal stromal cells diminish the effects of TGF‐β1 on equine dermal fibroblasts and alter the phenotype of dermal fibroblasts isolated from cutaneous fibroproliferative wounds.. Wound Repair Regen 2017;25(2):234‐247.
    doi: 10.1111/wrr.12515google scholar: lookup
  12. Bussche L, Van de Walle GR. Peripheral blood‐derived mesenchymal stromal cells promote angiogenesis via paracrine stimulation of vascular endothelial growth factor secretion in the equine model.. Stem Cells Transl Med 2014;3(12):1514‐1525.
    doi: 10.5966/sctm.2014‐0138google scholar: lookup
  13. Marx C, Gardner S, Harman RM, Van de Walle GR. The mesenchymal stromal cell secretome impairs methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus biofilms via cysteine protease activity in the equine model.. Stem Cells Transl Med 2020;9(7):746‐757.
    doi: 10.1002/sctm.19‐0333google scholar: lookup
  14. Westgate SJ, Percival SL, Knottenbelt DC, Clegg PD, Cochrane CA. Chronic equine wounds: what is the role of infection and biofilms?. Wounds 2010;22(6):138‐145.
  15. Little SV, Hillhouse AE, Lawhon SD, Bryan LK. Analysis of virulence and antimicrobial resistance gene carriage in Staphylococcus aureus infections in equids using whole‐genome sequencing.. mSphere 2021;6(4):e0019620.
    doi: 10.1128/msphere.00196‐20google scholar: lookup
  16. Harman RM, He MK, Zhang S, Van de Walle GR. Plasminogen activator inhibitor‐1 and tenascin‐C secreted by equine mesenchymal stromal cells stimulate dermal fibroblast migration in vitro and contribute to wound healing in vivo.. Cytotherapy 2018;20(8):1061‐1076.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2018.06.005google scholar: lookup
  17. Russell KA, Garbin LC, Wong JM, Koch TG. Mesenchymal stromal cells as potential antimicrobial for veterinary use—a comprehensive review.. Front Microbiol 2020;11:606404.
    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.606404google scholar: lookup
  18. Harman RM, Theoret CL, Van De Walle GR. The horse as a model for the study of cutaneous wound healing.. Adv Wound Care 2021;10(7):381‐399.
    doi: 10.1089/wound.2018.0883google scholar: lookup
  19. Lepault É, Céleste C, Doré M, Martineau D, Theoret CL. Comparative study on microvascular occlusion and apoptosis in body and limb wounds in the horse.. Wound Repair Regen 2005;13(5):520‐529.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1067‐1927.2005.00073.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  20. Jørgensen E, Bay L, Skovgaard LT, Bjarnsholt T, Jacobsen S. An equine wound model to study effects of bacterial aggregates on wound healing.. Adv Wound Care 2019;8(10):487‐498.
    doi: 10.1089/wound.2018.0901google scholar: lookup
  21. Celeste CJ, Deschene K, Riley CB, Theoret CL. Regional differences in wound oxygenation during normal healing in an equine model of cutaneous fibroproliferative disorder.. Wound Repair Regen 2011;19(1):89‐97.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1524‐475x.2010.00639.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  22. Theoret CL, Barber SM, Moyana TN, Gordon JR. Expression of transforming growth factor β1, β3, and basic fibroblast growth factor in full‐thickness skin wounds of equine limbs and thorax.. Vet Surg 2001;30(3):269‐277.
    doi: 10.1053/jvet.2001.23341google scholar: lookup
  23. Kamus LJ, Theoret C, Costa MC. Use of next generation sequencing to investigate the microbiota of experimentally induced wounds and the effect of bandaging in horses.. PLoS One 2018;13(11):e0206989.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206989google scholar: lookup
  24. Theoret CL, Barber SM, Moyana TN, Gordon JR. Preliminary observations on expression of transforming growth factors β1 and β3 in equine full‐thickness skin wounds healing normally or with exuberant granulation tissue.. Vet Surg 2002;31(3):266‐273.
    doi: 10.1053/jvet.2002.32394google scholar: lookup
  25. Marx C, Gardner S, Harman RM, Wagner B, Van de Walle GR. Mesenchymal stromal cell‐secreted CCL2 promotes antibacterial defense mechanisms through increased antimicrobial peptide expression in keratinocytes.. Stem Cells Transl Med 2021;10(12):1666‐1679.
    doi: 10.1002/sctm.21‐0058google scholar: lookup
  26. Kurach LM, Stanley BJ, Gazzola KM. The effect of low‐level laser therapy on the healing of open wounds in dogs.. Vet Surg 2015;44(8):988‐996.
    doi: 10.1111/vsu.12407google scholar: lookup
  27. Marchant K, Hendrickson DA, Pezzanite LM. Review of the role of biofilms in equine wounds: clinical indications and treatment strategies.. Equine Vet Educ 2023;36:152‐168.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.13919google scholar: lookup
  28. Woodward M, Pucheu‐Haston C. Skin biopsy.. Manual of Clinical Procedures in the Horse John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2017:570‐574.
    doi: 10.1002/9781118939956.ch71google scholar: lookup
  29. Kallstrom G. Are quantitative bacterial wound cultures useful?. J Clin Microbiol 2014;52(8):2753‐2756.
    doi: 10.1128/jcm.00522‐14google scholar: lookup
  30. Freeman K, Woods E, Welsby S, Percival SL, Cochrane CA. Biofilm evidence and the microbial diversity of horse wounds.. Can J Microbiol 2009;55(2):197‐202.
    doi: 10.1139/w08‐115google scholar: lookup
  31. Jørgensen E, Jacobsen S. Biofilm in equine and other veterinary wounds.. Antibiofilm Strategies Springer; 2022:553‐573.
    doi: 10.1007/978‐3‐031‐10992‐8_21google scholar: lookup
  32. Brock AK, Chamoun‐Emanuelli AM, Howard EA. Wound swabs versus biopsies to detect methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus in experimental equine wounds.. Vet Surg 2022;51(8):1196‐1205.
    doi: 10.1111/vsu.13872google scholar: lookup
  33. Jørgensen E, Bjarnsholt T, Jacobsen S. Biofilm and equine limb wounds.. Animals 2021;11(10):2825.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11102825google scholar: lookup
  34. Jørgensen E, Bay L, Bjarnsholt T, Bundgaard L, Sørensen MA, Jacobsen S. The occurrence of biofilm in an equine experimental wound model of healing by secondary intention.. Vet Microbiol 2017;204:90‐95.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2017.03.011google scholar: lookup
  35. Foster TJ. Antibiotic resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Current status and future prospects.. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2017;41(3):430‐449.
    doi: 10.1093/femsre/fux007google scholar: lookup
  36. Komprda T, Sládek Z, Vícenová M. Effect of polymeric nanoparticles with entrapped fish oil or mupirocin on skin wound healing using a porcine model.. Int J Mol Sci 2022;23(14):7663.
    doi: 10.3390/ijms23147663google scholar: lookup
  37. Gangwar A, Kumar P, Singh R, Kush P, Araujo D. Recent advances in Mupirocin delivery strategies for the treatment of bacterial skin and soft tissue infection.. Futur Pharmacol 2021;1(1):80‐103.
    doi: 10.3390/futurepharmacol1010007google scholar: lookup
  38. Kamus L, Theoret C. Choosing the best approach to wound management and closure.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2018;34(3):499‐509.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2018.07.005google scholar: lookup
  39. Leise BS. Topical wound medications.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2018;34(3):485‐498.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2018.07.006google scholar: lookup
  40. Pezzanite LM, Chow L, Dow SW, Goodrich LR, Gilbertie JM, Schnabel LV. Antimicrobial properties of equine stromal cells and platelets and future directions.. Vet Clin Equine Pract 2023;39(3):565‐578.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2023.06.005google scholar: lookup
  41. Turlo AJ, Hammond DE, Ramsbottom KA. Mesenchymal stromal cell Secretome is affected by tissue source and donor age.. Stem Cells 2023;41(11):1047‐1059.
    doi: 10.1093/stmcls/sxad060google scholar: lookup
  42. Connard SS, Linardi RL, Even KM, Berglund AK, Schnabel LV, Ortved KF. Effects of continuous passage on the immunomodulatory properties of equine bone marrow‐derived mesenchymal stem cells in vitro.. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2021;234:1102030.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2021.110203google scholar: lookup
  43. Harman RM, Patel RS, Fan JC, Park JE, Rosenberg BR, Van de Walle GR. Single‐cell RNA sequencing of equine mesenchymal stromal cells from primary donor‐matched tissue sources reveals functional heterogeneity in immune modulation and cell motility.. Stem Cell Res Ther 2020;11(1):524.
    doi: 10.1186/s13287‐020‐02043‐5google scholar: lookup
  44. Bundgaard L, Sørensen MA, Nilsson T, Salling E, Jacobsen S. Evaluation of systemic and local inflammatory parameters and manifestations of pain in an equine experimental wound model.. J Equine Vet Sci 2018;68:81‐87.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2018.05.219google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.