# Efficacy of Human Adipose Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Promoting Skin Wound Healing

Authors: Lingcong Zhou; Hui Wang; Sidi Yao; Li Li; Xin Kuang
Journal: Journal of Healthcare Engineering
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

Background. The aim of this pilot clinical study is to evaluate the efficacy of human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells (HAMSCs) treatment for the wound healing with patients. Methods. This study was a clinical trial to investigate the efficacy of human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells treatment for the wound healing with patients. 346 patients with skin wounds attending the central hospital of Yue Yang were enrolled in the study, setting in the period from January 2016 to January 2021. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups: experimental group received treatment with human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells for each 10 cm2 of wound and control group received conventional dressing with normal saline for each 10 cm2 of wound. Results. No adverse events were recorded during the period of treatment. The granulation tissue coverage rate and thickness of granulation tissue after 10 days of treatment in experimental group were significantly improved compared with control group. Furthermore, the occurrence of bleeding of wound and suppurative wounds between two groups had significant difference (P<0.05). Conclusion. The data in this pilot study indicated that human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells may be a safe and effective alternative therapy for wound healing. Moreover, larger, placebo-controlled, perspective studies are necessity to evaluate the efficacy and safety of human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells treatment for wound healing patients.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Wound healing is complex progress, containing hemostasis, epithelization, angiogenesis, granulation tissue formation, and collagen deposition [1]. In the United States, chronic wounds affect approximately 6.5 million patients, and approximately $25 billion is spent annually on treatment of these wounds. Furthermore, it severely affects people’s life quality [2]. Therefore, effective treatments to improve wound healing will be of great social significance.Wound healing is accomplished through the cooperation of a variety of cells and factors in the body, and their respective numbers need to be controlled within a balanced range [3]. In this process, any factors that break the balance will affect the wound healing speed and even leave abnormal scar [4]. The factors affecting wound healing can be divided into systemic factors and local factors. Systemic factors include nutritional status and complications, while local factors mainly refer to tissue hypoxia and wound infection [5, 6].Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are derived from mesoderm. As an adult stem cell, they exist in organ stroma and connective tissue with strong proliferation ability [7]. When in a suitable environment, they can differentiate into a variety of cells, such as osteoblasts [8, 9]. Therefore, they also show a certain multidirectional differentiation potential and can be separated from bone marrow and other tissues [10]. Compared with embryonic stem cells, MSCs have the advantages of no ethical disputes, wide sources, strong migration ability, and low immunogenicity [11]. Based on these advantages, it has been widely used in biomedicine. The International Society for Cell Therapy has put forward a general standard for MSCs: (1) under standard culture conditions, MSCs can adhere and grow on tissue culture vessels, that is, they must have viscoplasticity [12]; (2) MSCs must be able to express specific surface markers such as CD105, CD90, and CD34 [13]; (3) MSCs have the ability of osteogenic and adipogenic differentiation in vitro. This standard provides identification basis for preclinical and clinical studies of MSCs [14, 15].Therefore, the aim of this protocol study was to assess the efficacy of human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells treatment for the wound healing with patients.


## 2. Method

### 2.1. Study Design

This study was a clinical trial to investigate the efficacy of human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells treatment for the wound healing with patients. 346 patients with skin wounds attending the central hospital of Yue Yang were enrolled in the study, setting in the period from January 2016 to January 2021.The procedures of this clinical trial are presented in Figure1. All patients were recorded full medical history: cause, onset, course, and duration of wound(s), present extension or complication, history of smoking, and previous and present medications that could affect the healing process (Table 1). The treatment result and complications were recorded to detect the treatment efficacy.Figure 1
Flow chart showing recruitment.Table 1
Clinical characteristics of wounded patients in the experimental group and in control group.
Experimental group (n = 150)Control group (n = 150)tP valueAge (years)57.4 ± 5.2755.4 ± 5.460.350.213Female63 (43.2%)88 (58.7%)——Male83 (56.8%)62 (41.3%)——Weight (kg)66.4 ± 8.9661.53 ± 7.960.240.576BMI (kg/m2)22.73 ± 1.3922.87 ± 1.860.280 .78Size of the wound (cm2)323.53 ± 147.24299.56 ± 105.150.770.89Area of the body affectedUpper extremity48 (32.9%)53 (35.3%)——Lower limb57 (39%)45 (30%)——Back11 (7.5%)14 (9.3%)——Face3 (2%)5 (3.3%)——Anterior thorax9 (6.2%)10 (6.7%)——Abdomen12 (8.2%)13 (8.7%)——Sacrum2 (1.4%)4 (2.7%)——Head4 (2.7%)6 (4%)——Cause of the woundTrauma79 (54.1%)94 (62.7%)——Burn10 (6.8%)13 (8.7%)——Pressure33 (22.6%)29 (19.3%)——Scald24 (16.4%)14 (9.3%)——Wound classificationClean40 (27.4%)37 (24.7%)Clean contaminated32 (21.9%)39 (26%)Contaminated39 (26.7%)42 (28%)Dirty35 (24.4%)32 (21.3%)Healing rate (mm2/day)48.7 ± 19.5232.47 ± 14.100.910.006Time to healing (days)34.4 ± 14.2432.7 ± 9.381.440.39Note. significant difference as P<0.05.


### 2.2. Inclusion Criteria

The patients met the inclusion criteria as follows: (1) acute wounds (burns or crush wounds); (2) age ≤75 years old.


### 2.3. Exclusion Criteria

The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) age >75 years old, or diabetes mellitus; (2) pregnancy; (3) patients had blood systemic diseases; (4) patients had immunosuppressive therapy; (5) complicated wounds (e.g., bleeding or infection); (6) take medications likely to affect the outcome of the study; (7) cardiovascular diseases; (8) renal and hepatic failure; (9) peripheral arterial disease.


### 2.4. Ethics

This clinical study was approved by the Ethical Committee of The Central Hospital of Yue Yang Hospital, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. This study completely complied with the recommendations of the Declaration of Helsinki.


### 2.5. Preparation

Before starting the therapeutic procedure, all wounds were fully washed with physiologic serum (i.e., saline 0.9%). Dirty or crusted wounds were debrided using a surgical blade (bistori) and local anesthesia. Postdebridement bleeding was controlled using sterile gauze packing. Meanwhile, we measure the length of the wound and confirm that there is no active bleeding and exposure of important blood vessels, nerves, and tendons.


### 2.6. Treatment

The 316 eligible patients enrolled in this study were randomly allocated into two groups: the insulin group (n = 158) and the control group (n = 158).Experimental group patients received human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells for promoting wound healing. Control group patients received 1 ml saline 0.9% for each 10 cm2 of wound. The topical treatment was applied twice daily in both groups, left to dry for 30 minutes, and covered with sterile cotton gauze. All patients were positioned to prevent solution run-off from the wound. Neither the patient nor the physician was informed about treatment groups and solutions for ensuring blinding. The enrolled subjects accepted successive treatment until wound healing.The dead necrotic tissue attached to the wound was surgically debrided. All the wounds were thoroughly washed with 0.9% normal saline before applying the dressing. Systemic antibiotics were given based on pus culture and sensitivity. During the course of dressing, the wound was observed for granulation tissue, wound discharge, and control of infection. The outcome was measured in terms of reduction in wound size between the two groups.


### 2.7. Assessment of Efficacy

The primary end point of this research was total wound closure. Rate of wound healing was calculated as (the primary area-final wound area) (in mm2)/healing time (in days) and reported as (mm2/day) [16]. A wound was considered completely healed when wound was completely closed and epithelialized. Moreover, we investigate the granulation tissue coverage rate and thickness of granulation tissue to assess the progress of wound healing.Another primary end point was safety and adverse effect. General adverse effects were recorded as headache, palpitation, and vertigo (due to hypoglycemia). All adverse events were recorded during follow-up and evaluated by an independent committee.


### 2.8. Statistical Analysis

SPSS 22.0 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used for the statistical analysis. Thet-test was conducted to calculate the statistical significance between the groups. P≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.


## 2.1. Study Design

This study was a clinical trial to investigate the efficacy of human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells treatment for the wound healing with patients. 346 patients with skin wounds attending the central hospital of Yue Yang were enrolled in the study, setting in the period from January 2016 to January 2021.The procedures of this clinical trial are presented in Figure1. All patients were recorded full medical history: cause, onset, course, and duration of wound(s), present extension or complication, history of smoking, and previous and present medications that could affect the healing process (Table 1). The treatment result and complications were recorded to detect the treatment efficacy.Figure 1
Flow chart showing recruitment.Table 1
Clinical characteristics of wounded patients in the experimental group and in control group.
Experimental group (n = 150)Control group (n = 150)tP valueAge (years)57.4 ± 5.2755.4 ± 5.460.350.213Female63 (43.2%)88 (58.7%)——Male83 (56.8%)62 (41.3%)——Weight (kg)66.4 ± 8.9661.53 ± 7.960.240.576BMI (kg/m2)22.73 ± 1.3922.87 ± 1.860.280 .78Size of the wound (cm2)323.53 ± 147.24299.56 ± 105.150.770.89Area of the body affectedUpper extremity48 (32.9%)53 (35.3%)——Lower limb57 (39%)45 (30%)——Back11 (7.5%)14 (9.3%)——Face3 (2%)5 (3.3%)——Anterior thorax9 (6.2%)10 (6.7%)——Abdomen12 (8.2%)13 (8.7%)——Sacrum2 (1.4%)4 (2.7%)——Head4 (2.7%)6 (4%)——Cause of the woundTrauma79 (54.1%)94 (62.7%)——Burn10 (6.8%)13 (8.7%)——Pressure33 (22.6%)29 (19.3%)——Scald24 (16.4%)14 (9.3%)——Wound classificationClean40 (27.4%)37 (24.7%)Clean contaminated32 (21.9%)39 (26%)Contaminated39 (26.7%)42 (28%)Dirty35 (24.4%)32 (21.3%)Healing rate (mm2/day)48.7 ± 19.5232.47 ± 14.100.910.006Time to healing (days)34.4 ± 14.2432.7 ± 9.381.440.39Note. significant difference as P<0.05.


## 2.2. Inclusion Criteria

The patients met the inclusion criteria as follows: (1) acute wounds (burns or crush wounds); (2) age ≤75 years old.


## 2.3. Exclusion Criteria

The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) age >75 years old, or diabetes mellitus; (2) pregnancy; (3) patients had blood systemic diseases; (4) patients had immunosuppressive therapy; (5) complicated wounds (e.g., bleeding or infection); (6) take medications likely to affect the outcome of the study; (7) cardiovascular diseases; (8) renal and hepatic failure; (9) peripheral arterial disease.


## 2.4. Ethics

This clinical study was approved by the Ethical Committee of The Central Hospital of Yue Yang Hospital, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. This study completely complied with the recommendations of the Declaration of Helsinki.


## 2.5. Preparation

Before starting the therapeutic procedure, all wounds were fully washed with physiologic serum (i.e., saline 0.9%). Dirty or crusted wounds were debrided using a surgical blade (bistori) and local anesthesia. Postdebridement bleeding was controlled using sterile gauze packing. Meanwhile, we measure the length of the wound and confirm that there is no active bleeding and exposure of important blood vessels, nerves, and tendons.


## 2.6. Treatment

The 316 eligible patients enrolled in this study were randomly allocated into two groups: the insulin group (n = 158) and the control group (n = 158).Experimental group patients received human adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells for promoting wound healing. Control group patients received 1 ml saline 0.9% for each 10 cm2 of wound. The topical treatment was applied twice daily in both groups, left to dry for 30 minutes, and covered with sterile cotton gauze. All patients were positioned to prevent solution run-off from the wound. Neither the patient nor the physician was informed about treatment groups and solutions for ensuring blinding. The enrolled subjects accepted successive treatment until wound healing.The dead necrotic tissue attached to the wound was surgically debrided. All the wounds were thoroughly washed with 0.9% normal saline before applying the dressing. Systemic antibiotics were given based on pus culture and sensitivity. During the course of dressing, the wound was observed for granulation tissue, wound discharge, and control of infection. The outcome was measured in terms of reduction in wound size between the two groups.


## 2.7. Assessment of Efficacy

The primary end point of this research was total wound closure. Rate of wound healing was calculated as (the primary area-final wound area) (in mm2)/healing time (in days) and reported as (mm2/day) [16]. A wound was considered completely healed when wound was completely closed and epithelialized. Moreover, we investigate the granulation tissue coverage rate and thickness of granulation tissue to assess the progress of wound healing.Another primary end point was safety and adverse effect. General adverse effects were recorded as headache, palpitation, and vertigo (due to hypoglycemia). All adverse events were recorded during follow-up and evaluated by an independent committee.


## 2.8. Statistical Analysis

SPSS 22.0 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used for the statistical analysis. Thet-test was conducted to calculate the statistical significance between the groups. P≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.


## 3. Results

### 3.1. Characteristics of the Subjects

Among the 338 patients enrolled, 13 patients did not meet inclusion criteria and 9 were not willing to participate in this clinical study. Finally, 316 eligible patients were enrolled in this pilot study; they were randomly allocated into two groups: the insulin group (n = 158) and the control group (n = 158) (Figure 1). In the progress, the experimental group excluded 12 patients and the control group excluded 8 patients. Finally, 146 patients were analyzed in the experimental group, and 150 patients were analyzed in the control group. The demographic characteristics of the subjects are showed in Table 1; there was no significant difference in age, weight, BMI, size of the wound, wound classification, and time to healing between the two groups (P>0.05). Interestingly, the healing rates were significantly improved in the experimental group (P<0.05).


### 3.2. Safety Evaluation of Therapy

No adverse events were reported during the period of our research. No significant adverse effects from wound such as sweating, palpitations, and headache were observed. No serious adverse events such as allergic reactions and fever were observed.


### 3.3. The Growth of Granulation Tissue

The clinical wound healing rate of patients was improved after treatment. The rate of wound healing significantly increased (P=0.008) (Table 1). Table 2 indicates that the granulation tissue coverage rate and thickness of granulation tissue after 10 days of treatment in experimental group were 32.6 ± 10.1% and 3.47 ± 0.84 mm, which were significantly improved compared with control group (P<0.05).Table 2
Comparison of the growth of granulation tissue in the two groups after 10 days of treatment.
Experimental group (n = 146)Control group (n = 150)tP valueGranulation tissue coverage rate (%)32.6 ± 10.121.4 ± 8.910.78<0.05The thickness of granulation tissue (mm)3.47 ± 0.842.60 ± 1.9225.37<0.05Note. Significant difference as P<0.05.


### 3.4. Complications of Therapy

As demonstrated in Table3, the occurrence of bleeding of wound and suppurative wounds between two groups had significant difference (P<0.05), and the occurrence of other complications (such as wound infection, malnutrition, hypoproteinemia, osteomyelitis, and septicemia) had no significant difference between two groups (P>0.05).Table 3
Comparison of complications in the two groups after treatment.
Experimental group (n = 146)Control group (n = 150)tP valueBleeding of wound (%)10 (6.8%)16 (10.7%)5.8430.041Wound infection (%)6 (4.1%)11 (7.3%)4.9310.054Suppurative wounds2 (1.4%)8 (5.3%)6.1720.045Malnutrition8 (5.5%)16 (10.7%)5.6240.059Hypoproteinemia9 (6.2%)15 (10%)5.3610.054Osteomyelitis1 (0.7%)4 (2.7%)3.1280.143Septicemia3 (2.1%)7 (4.7%)2.1950.642Note. Significant difference as P<0.05.


## 3.1. Characteristics of the Subjects

Among the 338 patients enrolled, 13 patients did not meet inclusion criteria and 9 were not willing to participate in this clinical study. Finally, 316 eligible patients were enrolled in this pilot study; they were randomly allocated into two groups: the insulin group (n = 158) and the control group (n = 158) (Figure 1). In the progress, the experimental group excluded 12 patients and the control group excluded 8 patients. Finally, 146 patients were analyzed in the experimental group, and 150 patients were analyzed in the control group. The demographic characteristics of the subjects are showed in Table 1; there was no significant difference in age, weight, BMI, size of the wound, wound classification, and time to healing between the two groups (P>0.05). Interestingly, the healing rates were significantly improved in the experimental group (P<0.05).


## 3.2. Safety Evaluation of Therapy

No adverse events were reported during the period of our research. No significant adverse effects from wound such as sweating, palpitations, and headache were observed. No serious adverse events such as allergic reactions and fever were observed.


## 3.3. The Growth of Granulation Tissue

The clinical wound healing rate of patients was improved after treatment. The rate of wound healing significantly increased (P=0.008) (Table 1). Table 2 indicates that the granulation tissue coverage rate and thickness of granulation tissue after 10 days of treatment in experimental group were 32.6 ± 10.1% and 3.47 ± 0.84 mm, which were significantly improved compared with control group (P<0.05).Table 2
Comparison of the growth of granulation tissue in the two groups after 10 days of treatment.
Experimental group (n = 146)Control group (n = 150)tP valueGranulation tissue coverage rate (%)32.6 ± 10.121.4 ± 8.910.78<0.05The thickness of granulation tissue (mm)3.47 ± 0.842.60 ± 1.9225.37<0.05Note. Significant difference as P<0.05.


## 3.4. Complications of Therapy

As demonstrated in Table3, the occurrence of bleeding of wound and suppurative wounds between two groups had significant difference (P<0.05), and the occurrence of other complications (such as wound infection, malnutrition, hypoproteinemia, osteomyelitis, and septicemia) had no significant difference between two groups (P>0.05).Table 3
Comparison of complications in the two groups after treatment.
Experimental group (n = 146)Control group (n = 150)tP valueBleeding of wound (%)10 (6.8%)16 (10.7%)5.8430.041Wound infection (%)6 (4.1%)11 (7.3%)4.9310.054Suppurative wounds2 (1.4%)8 (5.3%)6.1720.045Malnutrition8 (5.5%)16 (10.7%)5.6240.059Hypoproteinemia9 (6.2%)15 (10%)5.3610.054Osteomyelitis1 (0.7%)4 (2.7%)3.1280.143Septicemia3 (2.1%)7 (4.7%)2.1950.642Note. Significant difference as P<0.05.


## 4. Discussion

This pilot research demonstrated that HAMSCs treatment could promote wound healing in patients, such as the granulation tissue coverage rate, the healing rate, and thickness of granulation tissue, which were improved. Furthermore, the results in this protocol study also showed that there were no serious adverse events observed during the period of study, which indicated the safety of HAMSCs treatment in patients.ADMSCs come from mesoderm [17]. They are isolated from adipose tissue around blood vessels and cultured. They can differentiate into a variety of cells, including bone cells, chondrocytes, and nerve cells [18]. Compared with other MSCs, ADMSCs are not only easy to obtain but also show multidirectional differentiation potential, and there is no ethical dispute [19]. Secondly, ADMSCs are homing after transplantation, mainly distributed in the injury site. Many literatures show that ADMSCs have good immunomodulatory effect, inhibit dendritic cell (DC) maturation, and induce immune tolerance by negatively regulating immunity [20, 21]; Induce macrophage (M2) polarization and downregulate immune response [49]; Inhibit the proliferation of NK cells and keep them in the tissue for enough time to balance the immune response before clearance; inhibit the proliferation of B cells and T cells [22]. ADMSCs did not express major histocompatibility complex II, which help promote the release of factors such as PGE2 and control the mixed lymphocyte reaction after transplantation [23]. Therefore, ADMSCs can effectively inhibit the acute immune response of the host. There are also limits of this study. First, the evaluation index of the result is a little simple, which needs more complex comparison. Second, the mechanism is not detected, which is not so scientific. Furthermore, the basic concept needs more verification in future.


## 5. Conclusion

This protocol clinical trial suggested that HAMSCs injections may be a safe and feasible therapy for wound healing in patients. A larger, placebo-controlled, perspective, multicenter studies are necessity to further study the efficacy and safety of HAMSCs treatment for wound healing patients.



---

*Source: 6590025-2022-03-24.xml*