Cited by 103Wound Healing and TreatmentsNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyNerve injury and regeneration

Influence of sensory neuropeptides on human cutaneous wound healing process

Chéret, J., Lebonvallet, N., Buhé, V., Carre, J.L., Misery, L., Le Gall-Ianotto, C.·2014·Journal of Dermatological Science

Abstract

Background Close interactions exist between primary sensory neurons of the peripheral nervous system (PNS) and skin cells. The PNS may be implicated in the modulation of different skin functions as wound healing.Objective Study the influence of sensory neurons in human cutaneous wound healing.Methods We incubated injured human skin explants either with rat primary sensory neurons from dorsal root ganglia (DRG) or different neuropeptides (vasoactive intestinal peptide or VIP, calcitonin gene-related peptide or CGRP, substance P or SP) at various concentrations. Then we evaluated their effects on the proliferative and extracellular matrix (ECM) remodeling phases, dermal fibroblasts adhesion and differentiation into myofibroblasts.Results Thus, DRG and all studied neuromediators increased fibroblasts and keratinocytes proliferation and act on the expression ratio between collagen type I and type III in favor of collagen I, particularly between the 3rd and 7th day of culture. Furthermore, the enzymatic activities of matrix metalloprotesases (MMP-2 and MMP-9) were increased in the first days of wound healing process. Finally, the adhesion of human dermal fibroblasts and their differentiation into myofibroblasts were promoted after incubation with neuromediators. Interestingly, the most potent concentrations for each tested molecules, were the lowest concentrations, corresponding to physiological concentrations.Conclusion Sensory neurons and their derived-neuropeptides are able to promote skin wound healing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jdermsci.2014.02.001

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chéret, J., Lebonvallet, N., Buhé, V., Carre, J. L., Misery, L., & Le Gall-Ianotto, C.
Affiliations
Université de Bretagne Occidentale (FR)
Corresponding author
Misery, L.
Venue
Journal of Dermatological Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-06
Volume
74
Issue
3
Pages
193-203
ISSN
0923-1811 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2084961143
Cited by
103
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 3
FWCI
8.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Dermatological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Wound Healing and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Nerve injury and regeneration
Keywords
sensory neuropeptides, skin wound healing, primary sensory neurons, dorsal root ganglia, vasoactive intestinal peptide, calcitonin gene-related peptide, substance P, dermal fibroblasts, myofibroblast differentiation, keratinocyte proliferation, extracellular matrix remodeling, type I collagen, matrix metalloproteinases, MMP-2, MMP-9, skin explants
MeSH terms
Animals, Cell Adhesion, Cell Differentiation, Collagen, Humans, Neuropeptides, Sensory Receptor Cells, Skin, Wound Healing, Coculture Techniques, Matrix Metalloproteinases, Cell Proliferation, Rats, Myofibroblasts, Re-Epithelialization, In Vitro Techniques

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review