Wound healing is an important function of skin; however, after significant skin injury (burns) or in certain dermatological pathologies (chronic wounds), this important process can be deregulated or lost, resulting in severe complications. To avoid these, studies have focused on developing tissue-engineered skin substitutes (TESSs), which attempt to replace and regenerate the damaged skin. Autologous cultured epithelial substitutes (CESs) constituted of keratinocytes, allogeneic cultured dermal substitutes (CDSs) composed of biomaterials and fibroblasts and autologous composite skin substitutes (CSSs) comprised of biomaterials, keratinocytes and fibroblasts, have been the most studied clinical TESSs, reporting positive results for different pathological conditions. However, researchers’ purpose is to develop TESSs that resemble in a better way the human skin and its wound healing process. For this reason, they have also evaluated at preclinical level the incorporation of other human cell types such as melanocytes, Merkel and Langerhans cells, skin stem cells (SSCs), induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) or mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). Among these, MSCs have been also reported in clinical studies with hopeful results. Future perspectives in the field of human-TESSs are focused on improving in vivo animal models, incorporating immune cells, designing specific niches inside the biomaterials to increase stem cell potential and developing three-dimensional bioprinting strategies, with the final purpose of increasing patient’s health care. In this review we summarize the use of different human cell populations for preclinical and clinical TESSs under research, remarking their strengths and limitations and discuss the future perspectives, which could be useful for wound healing purposes.

Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (MSCs) are of great interest in cellular therapy. Different routes of administration of MSCs have been described both in pre-clinical and clinical reports. Knowledge about the fate of the administered cells is critical for developing MSC-based therapies. The aim of this review is to describe how MSCs are distributed after injection, using different administration routes in animal models and humans. A literature search was performed in order to consider how MSCs distribute after intravenous, intraarterial, intramuscular, intraarticular and intralesional injection into both animal models and humans. Studies addressing the biodistribution of MSCs in “in vivo” animal models and humans were included. After the search, 109 articles were included in the review. Intravenous administration of MSCs is widely used; it leads to an initial accumulation of cells in the lungs with later redistribution to the liver, spleen and kidneys. Intraarterial infusion bypasses the lungs, so MSCs distribute widely throughout the rest of the body. Intramuscular, intraarticular and intradermal administration lack systemic biodistribution. Injection into various specific organs is also described. Biodistribution of MSCs in animal models and humans appears to be similar and depends on the route of administration. More studies with standardized protocols of MSC administration could be useful in order to make results homogeneous and more comparable.

Background There is not an ideal biomaterial for tissue-engineered skin substitutes (TESSs), and most of the studies or existing therapies use xenogeneic origin natural biomaterials or biosynthetic scaffolds. Objective To analyse clinical, histological integration and homeostasis parameters of a human TESS manufactured with fibrin-hyaluronic acid biomaterial (HA-Skin), grafted in immunodeficient mice for 8 weeks, and compared with the gold standard treatment (Autograft), a human TESS manufactured with fibrin-agarose biomaterial (AG-Skin) and secondary wound healing dressings. Methods Human TESSs and autografts were implanted into BALB/c mice after surgical excision. Secondary wound healing approach was achieved with biosynthetic collagen wound dressing (Biobrane â) and fibrin-hyaluronic acid or fibrin-agarose biomaterial without cells (Total N = 44). Clinical integration and homeostasis parameters were evaluated every two weeks for two months. Histological and immunohistochemical analyses were performed four and eight weeks after grafting. Results HA-Skin, AG-Skin and Autograft groups showed a proper clinical integration and epithelization eight weeks later. Scar evaluation revealed better results for Autograft and HA-Skin. Homeostasis analysis indicated similar values of transepidermal water loss and elasticity between HA-Skin (6.42 AE 0.75 g/h/m 2 , 0.42 AE 0.08 AU), Autograft (6.91 AE 1.28 g/h/m 2 , 0.40 AE 0.08 AU) and healthy mouse skin (6.40 AE 0.43 g/h/m 2 , 0.35 AE 0.03 AU). Histological results showed that human TESSs and autografts presented better skin structuration and higher expression of cytokeratins. Conclusions This study suggests that human TESS based on fibrin-hyaluronic acid biomaterial could be suitable for clinical application in the treatment of several dermatological pathologies (wound healing).