Article

Quantitative comparison of the expression of antimicrobial peptides in the oral mucosa and extraoral skin

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, D-81675 Munich, Germany.
British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (Impact Factor: 2.72). 08/2011; 50(5):447-453. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2011.07.006

ABSTRACT Antimicrobial peptides (AMP) defend epithelial surfaces against pathological micro-organisms. We know of no comparison of their expression between the oral mucosa and extraoral epithelium, but knowledge of differences in their quantities is of interest, possibly as a starting point for new treatments. Expression of AMP human beta-defensin (hBD)-1/-2/-3 and psoriasin in the oral mucosa and extraoral epithelium of the head and neck were measured by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) (n = 14), immunohistochemistry (n = 6), and western blot (n = 8). RT-PCR showed that all the genes investigated were expressed significantly more in the oral mucosa than in the skin (hBD-1: p = 0.002; hBD-2: p = 0.006; hBD-3: p = 0.035; psoriasin: p = 0.02). Immunohistochemistry and western blot showed differential concentrations of proteins: hBD-2 (p = 0.021) and hBD-3 (p = 0.043) were pronounced in the oral mucosa, whereas psoriasin was raised in the extraoral skin (p = 0.021). There was no difference in protein concentrations for hBD-1 (p = 0.08). The observed differences in the expression of AMP may be important for new treatments such as topical application of AMP derivatives.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
83 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Wounds in adults are frequently accompanied by scar formation. This scar can become fibrotic due to an imbalance between extracellular matrix (ECM) synthesis and ECM degradation. Oral mucosal wounds, however, heal in an accelerated fashion, displaying minimal scar formation. The exact mechanisms of scarless oral healing are yet to be revealed. This review highlights possible mechanisms involved in the difference between scar-forming dermal vs. scarless oral mucosal wound healing. Differences were found in expression of ECM components, such as procollagen I and tenascin-C. Oral wounds contained fewer immune mediators, blood vessels, and profibrotic mediators but had more bone marrow-derived cells, a higher reepithelialization rate, and faster proliferation of fibroblasts compared with dermal wounds. These results form a basis for further research that should be focused on the relations among ECM, immune cells, growth factors, and fibroblast phenotypes, as understanding scarless oral mucosal healing may ultimately lead to novel therapeutic strategies to prevent fibrotic scars.
    Wound Repair and Regeneration 08/2013; · 2.76 Impact Factor