Comparative proteomic analysis of regenerative acellular matrices: The effects of tissue source and processing method.

Acellular tissue matrices are used in regenerative medicine from weak tissue re-enforcement to cosmetic augmentation. However, proteomic signatures leading to different clinical outcomes among matrices are not well understood. In an attempt to investigate the effects of tissue source and processing method, we examined by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) the proteomic profiles of 12 regulatory agency-approved acellular matrices (AlloMax, AlloDerm, CollaMend, Heal-All, JayyaLife, ReGen, Renov, Strattice, SurgiMend, Surgisis, UniTrump and Vidasis). The compositions of acellular matrices varied greatly with the number of identified proteins ranging from 7 to 106. The content of individual proteins was between 0.0001% and 95.8% according to their abundances measured by the M/Z signal intensities. Most acellular matrices still contained numerous cellular proteins. AlloMax, AlloDerm, ReGen, Strattice, SurgiMend and Surgisis retained necessary structural and functional proteins to form the extracellular protein-protein interaction networks for cell adhesion, proliferation and tissue regeneration, whereas CollaMend, Heal-All, JayyaLife, Renov, UniTrump and Vidasis had only retained certain structural collagens. Principal component analysis showed that proteomic variations among acellular matrices were largely attributed to tissue source and processing method. Differences in proteomic profiles among acellular matrices offers insights into molecular interpretation for different clinical outcomes, and can serve as useful references for rational design of regenerative bio-scaffolds.

[1]  Wendell Q. Sun,et al.  Complete proteomic profiling of regenerative bio-scaffolds with a two-step trypsinization method. , 2022, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[2]  R. Gruber,et al.  Proteomic Analysis of Porcine-Derived Collagen Membrane and Matrix , 2020, Materials.

[3]  Yun-ping Zhu,et al.  Comprehensive proteomic atlas of skin biomatrix scaffolds reveals a supportive microenvironment for epidermal development , 2020, Journal of tissue engineering.

[4]  E. Wilkins,et al.  Development of an evidence-based approach to the use of acellular dermal matrix in immediate expander-implant-based breast reconstruction. , 2020, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[5]  H. Yagi,et al.  Assembly and Function of a Bioengineered Human Liver for Transplantation Generated Solely from Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells. , 2020, Cell reports.

[6]  M. Moore,et al.  Achilles Tendon Augmented Repair Using Human Acellular Dermal Matrix: A Case Series , 2018, The Journal of foot and ankle surgery : official publication of the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons.

[7]  M. Scheflan,et al.  Histopathological Study of Meshed Versus Solid Sheet Acellular Dermal Matrices in a Porcine Model , 2018, Annals of plastic surgery.

[8]  J. Gimble,et al.  Comparative proteomic analyses of human adipose extracellular matrices decellularized using alternative procedures. , 2018, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[9]  F. Mazari,et al.  The Comparison of Strattice and SurgiMend in Acellular Dermal Matrix–Assisted, Implant-Based Immediate Breast Reconstruction , 2018, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[10]  E. Gutteridge,et al.  Complete resorption of Veritas® in acellular dermal matrix (ADM)-assisted implant-based breast reconstructions—is there a need for tighter regulation of new products developed for use in breast reconstruction? , 2018, European Journal of Plastic Surgery.

[11]  E. Wilkins,et al.  Acellular Dermal Matrix in Immediate Expander/Implant Breast Reconstruction: A Multicenter Assessment of Risks and Benefits , 2017, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[12]  J. Smeekens,et al.  Evaluation and optimization of reduction and alkylation methods to maximize peptide identification with MS-based proteomics. , 2017, Molecular bioSystems.

[13]  P. Hains,et al.  The Impact of Commonly Used Alkylating Agents on Artifactual Peptide Modification. , 2017, Journal of proteome research.

[14]  Elizabeth A. Calle,et al.  Targeted proteomics effectively quantifies differences between native lung and detergent-decellularized lung extracellular matrices. , 2016, Acta biomaterialia.

[15]  Stephen F Badylak,et al.  Extracellular matrix bioscaffolds in tissue remodeling and morphogenesis , 2016, Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists.

[16]  Elizabeth A. Calle,et al.  Quantification of Extracellular Matrix Proteins from a Rat Lung Scaffold to Provide a Molecular Readout for Tissue Engineering* , 2015, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[17]  Megan B Steigelman,et al.  Comparison of AlloDerm and AlloMax Tissue Incorporation in Rats , 2014, Annals of plastic surgery.

[18]  Xi Ren,et al.  Perfusion decellularization of human and porcine lungs: bringing the matrix to clinical scale. , 2014, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[19]  P. D. De Deyne,et al.  Comparative Host Response of 2 Human Acellular Dermal Matrices in a Primate Implant Model , 2014, Eplasty.

[20]  Wendell Q. Sun,et al.  Process-induced extracellular matrix alterations affect the mechanisms of soft tissue repair and regeneration , 2013, Journal of tissue engineering.

[21]  H. Ehrén,et al.  Use of Surgisis for Abdominal Wall Reconstruction in Children with Abdominal Wall Defects , 2013, European Journal of Pediatric Surgery.

[22]  S. Glasberg,et al.  AlloDerm and Strattice in Breast Reconstruction: A Comparison and Techniques for Optimizing Outcomes , 2012, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[23]  K. Billiar,et al.  Dermal collagen matrices for ventral hernia repair: comparative analysis in a rat model , 2012, Hernia.

[24]  S. Badylak,et al.  A comprehensive protein expression profile of extracellular matrix biomaterial derived from porcine urinary bladder. , 2012, Regenerative medicine.

[25]  Ricardo Londono,et al.  Consequences of ineffective decellularization of biologic scaffolds on the host response. , 2012, Biomaterials.

[26]  D. Oleynikov,et al.  Not all biologics are equal! , 2011, Hernia.

[27]  A. H. Nguyen,et al.  Comparison of Permacol™ and Strattice™ for the repair of abdominal wall defects , 2011, Hernia.

[28]  L. Gordon,et al.  Comprehensive Profiling of Cartilage Extracellular Matrix Formation and Maturation Using Sequential Extraction and Label-free Quantitative Proteomics* , 2010, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[29]  N. Bachrach,et al.  Retention of structural and biochemical integrity in a biological mesh supports tissue remodeling in a primate abdominal wall model. , 2009, Regenerative medicine.

[30]  George P McCabe,et al.  Macrophage phenotype and remodeling outcomes in response to biologic scaffolds with and without a cellular component. , 2009, Biomaterials.

[31]  D. Ayares,et al.  A porcine-derived acellular dermal scaffold that supports soft tissue regeneration: removal of terminal galactose-alpha-(1,3)-galactose and retention of matrix structure. , 2009, Tissue engineering. Part A.

[32]  R. Treat,et al.  Results of AlloDerm use in abdominal hernia repair , 2008, Hernia.

[33]  J. Harper,et al.  Extracellular Wound Matrices:A Novel Regenerative Tissue Matrix (RTM) Technology for Connective Tissue Reconstruction. , 2007, Wounds : a compendium of clinical research and practice.

[34]  Jiake Xu,et al.  Porcine small intestine submucosa (SIS) is not an acellular collagenous matrix and contains porcine DNA: possible implications in human implantation. , 2005, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[35]  E. Rodriguez,et al.  Revascularization of Human Acellular Dermis in Full-Thickness Abdominal Wall Reconstruction in the Rabbit Model , 2003, Annals of plastic surgery.

[36]  Stephen F Badylak,et al.  The extracellular matrix as a scaffold for tissue reconstruction. , 2002, Seminars in cell & developmental biology.

[37]  S. Mccormick,et al.  Biophysical and microscopic analysis of homologous dermal and fascial materials for facial aesthetic and reconstructive uses. , 2002, Archives of facial plastic surgery.

[38]  Jesse E. Thompson,et al.  Bovine Pericardial Patch Angioplasty in Carotid Endarterectomy , 2001, The American surgeon.

[39]  C. Schmidt,et al.  Acellular vascular tissues: natural biomaterials for tissue repair and tissue engineering. , 2000, Biomaterials.

[40]  J. Hunt,et al.  Clinical evaluation of an acellular allograft dermal matrix in full-thickness burns. , 1996, The Journal of burn care & rehabilitation.

[41]  D. Herndon,et al.  Transplanted acellular allograft dermal matrix. Potential as a template for the reconstruction of viable dermis. , 1995, Transplantation.

[42]  J. Gimble,et al.  Decellularized Adipose Tissue: Biochemical Composition, in vivo Analysis and Potential Clinical Applications. , 2019, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[43]  Vineet Agrawal,et al.  Damage associated molecular patterns within xenogeneic biologic scaffolds and their effects on host remodeling. , 2012, Biomaterials.

[44]  Kerry A. Daly,et al.  Biologic scaffolds for constructive tissue remodeling. , 2011, Biomaterials.