3. Discussion
Trauma, of any kind and etiology, is considered a damage in tissue integrity. Most commonly, with the exception of blunt, internal organ trauma, it includes the skin epithelium, which is the host barrier to the external attack and is largely responsible for body homeostasis. Today, based on current knowledge, teleologically the most destructive consequence of trauma is the alteration in the beta-diversity of resident microbiota, sometimes severe, leading to increased probability of infection, local and systemic, and even worse, the prolongation of healing time.
Wound healing consists of a complex sequence of cellular – with neutrophils, macrophages, fibroblasts and epithelial cells mainly involved – and molecular signaling – with cytokines, chemokines, their inhibitors and receptors and growth factors –, that orchestrate and promote resurfacing, reconstitution, and restoration of the tensile strength of the wounded area, in an overlapping consequence of three characteristic phases: hemostasis/inflammation, cell proliferation, and remodeling or scar formation. The presence or absence of these cellular and molecular elements, at the right time and to the right degree, wonderfully coordinates the wound healing process [
28,
45,
46]. A deep understanding of the wound healing process as a whole, and the critical roles of each different cell and molecule involved will allow the development of more sophisticated therapies for wound repair, as well the prevention of excessive fibrosis and bad scar formation.
Given that tissue damage hinders the natural activity of the local microbiome and causes imbalance even at the phylum level, by means of a shortage of specific genus and species, treatment with probiotics is suggested as an interesting, promising, therapeutic alternative; thus, there is a trend today towards local probiotic therapy through restoration of the affected microbiome [
14,
15]. Hundreds of publications of both experiments based on scratched cell-cultures and excisional wound models, but also many clinical studies, less sophisticated than experimental ones, have highlighted the beneficial effects of probiotics; to say nothing of the personal experience of many of us who sprinkle the contents of a probiotic capsule on an infected surgical wound, just as we once did with antibiotics. More precisely, the topical application of probiotics or their lysates/extracts has been shown overall to promote healing through the inhibition of the growth of pathogenic bacteria, the regulation of local inflammatory response and by interacting with epidermis cells [
33]. Despite all these, it is overall very difficult to assess the precise role of probiotics in the healing process, knowing well that each strain has a separate, distinctive, and even multi-factorial feature of action. Here, we try to recognize the most documented points in the whole "healing" mechanism, where each of the most frequently involved probiotic species and strains are positively implicated.
Innate inflammation is the primary defense event against invasion by potential pathogens, initiated by injury-induced molecular signals, leading rapidly to first recruitment of neutrophils and many pro-inflammatory cytokines which attract further neutrophils and then facilitate entry of monocytes. It is well known that delay, of whatever the cause, in debridement and subsequent phagocytosis of neutrophils leads to a chronic wound, which means the faster the debridement, the faster the healing. Probiotics seem to work toward that end in two steps:
L. plantarum spp as the USM8613, MTCC 2621, SGL07 and UBLP-40 have been recognized in many studies as being that which has the strongest anti-inflammatory action; not only by means of significantly up-regulating the pro-inflammatory factors IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IFN-γ, β-defensin and the mRNA expression of CXCL10 and CXCL8 − seriously involved in neutrophil and macrophage recruitment, but also by earlier down-regulating IL-8, IL-6, MCP-1 and RANTES and up-regulating the anti-inflammatory IL-10 and others. These actions clearly document their marked anti-inflammatory effect, which is possibly involved in the reduction of hypertrophic wound scar formation [
14,
16,
21,
26,
29]. Furthermore, earlier experiments, having documented a faster wound closure during the inflammatory phase [days 1 to 4], clearly suggested the anti-inflammatory properties of probiotics [
15,
22,
23]. In the same manner, other probiotic bacteria, such as the
L. rhamnosus UBLR-58,
L. acidophilus LA-5,
L. fermentum SGL10,
L. brevis GQ4237768,
L. brevis SGL 12,
L. paracasei SGL 04 and
B. longum UBBL-64 have been found to exert anti-inflammatory action through the same mechanisms, but to a significantly lesser degree, compared mainly with
L. plantarum [
14,
16,
26,
34,
35]. Additionally, other probiotics,
L. plantarum being the best, were found to exert antioxidant properties.
Then monocytes, upon reaching the site of injury are differentiated into macrophages, which further promote inflammation by releasing inflammatory factors and reactive oxygen species [
47]. Lombardi et al [
27] have reported a significant up-regulation of nitric oxide synthase 2 [NOS2], leading to an increase of nitrate levels in the wound site, by
L. Plantarum Lp-115,
L. acidophilus and
Streptococcus thermophilus DSM 24731, all very significantly less [p<0.0001] than
L. plantarum, while
B. longum down-modulated the NOS2 production. In parallel,
L. reuteri DSM 17938 was found to exert antioxidant properties, since tissue myeloperoxidase was significantly decreased after treatment [
38]. However, NOS2 is additionally involved in the regulation of endothelial cell recruitment to the ischemic wound, thus these probiotics are also implicated in this process.
During the later stages of the inflammatory phase, in situ switching of M1 macrophages to the anti-inflammatory M2 phenotype occurs − stimulated by efferocytosis, or changes in cytokines [
47,
48,
49,
50,
51]. These M2 macrophages now express anti-inflammatory cytokines and arginase, along with various growth factors, which promote angiogenesis and cellular proliferation, migration and differentiation of keratinocytes, fibroblasts and epithelial cells. Recently, a speeding up of the switching process has been recognized in
L. plantarum-treated patients [
23].
Phagocytosis of apoptotic neutrophils by macrophages is an important event in the release of soluble factors, including transforming growth factor beta [TGF-β], which plays a major role in the regulation of the formation and remodeling of granulation tissue, thus entering the healing process in the proliferating phase [
51]. Practically, this second phase of wound healing begins with extensive activation of keratinocytes, fibroblasts, macrophages, and endothelial cells to promote wound closure, collagen deposition, and angiogenesis [
47]. Chemoattractants released by macrophages attract fibroblasts, activate them to proliferate and modulate the production of matrix metalloproteinases [MMPs] and their inhibitors.
L. plantarum GMNL-6,
L. reuteri DSM17938 and
L. paracasei GMNL-653 increased MMP-1 expression in the early stage [day-5], but then gradually decreased it [up to day-9], earlier than in controls, as also occurred with the
L. plantarum USM8613 [
21,
28,
39]. It is also reported that
L. acidophilus treatment results in stellate rather than oval-shaped scars in controls, the difference attributable to the increased wound contraction [
24].
Mature fibroblasts, after being differentiated into myofibroblasts migrate towards the granulation tissue, and, driven by TGF- β are ready to express α-smooth muscle actin [α-SMA] which contracts the wound.
L. plantarum GMNL-6,
L. paracasei GMNL-653 and
S. thermophilus DSM 24731 were found to exert an earlier, dose dependent inhibitory effect on α-SMA expression, in parallel with the presence of structured collagen fiber, probably thus contributing to prevention of excessive skin fibrosis [
28,
44].
Additionally, myofibroblasts, stimulated by TGF-β, also initiate collagen synthesis and collagen deposition, the immature collagen III being replaced by collagen I, which have a higher tissue strength [
48,
52,
53].
L. plantarum UBLP-40 was found to initiate a significant induction of collagen III mRNA expression from day 2, while reducing the TGF-β expression by day 8 [
14,
16], as also occurs with Streptococcus thermophilus DSM 24731 in a time- and concentration-dependent manner [
27]. However, B. longum UBBL-64 exerts a less profound up-regulation of collagen III mRNA expression, in relation to
L. plantarum UBLP-40 [
16]. Satish et al [
10] reported a significant inhibition of collagen I mRNA expression and an increased production of type III, suggesting that
L. plantarum ATCC10241 can modulate not only the quantity but also the type of collagen synthesized in response to injury and infection, thus alleviating excessive scaring.
Keratinocytes, with the aid of MMP-1 and MMP-9, migrate and proliferate through the wound bed to meet keratinocytes from the opposite edges, to form a thin epithelial layer [
47,
50,
54].
L. plantarum USM8613 accelerated keratinocyte migration towards the center of the wound and complete re-epithelization by day 12, in relation to controls which achieve complete re-epithelization only by day 16 [
21], while the
L. plantarum SGL07 in keratinocyte monolayers exhibits a strong induction of both migration and proliferation [
26]. Similar double action is exerted by
Streptococcus thermophilus DSM 24731 [
27], as well as
L. rhamnosus GG ATCC 53103 and
L. reuteri. Migration is the main action of
L. rhamnosus and proliferation that of
L. reuteri [
33]. Finally,
L. casei 324 m and SGL 15 and
L. brevis SGL 12 stimulate only cell proliferation [
18,
26,
36], while
Lactobacillus fermentum SGL 10 and
Saccharomyces boulardi Unique-28 does not stimulate monolayer re-epithelialization but strongly enhances migration [
14,
26]. Incidentally,
L. acidophilus LA-5 does not express a significant migratory effect on colonic subepithelial myofibroblasts [
14].
Regarding angiogenesis, the process is initiated earlier than the controls, upon neutrophils reduction; this, on its own, means that probiotics such as the
L. plantarum spp which exert strong anti-inflammatory properties reduce the recruited neutrophils in the wound earlier, and thus angiogenesis begins earlier. Besides the vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] regulated by tissue hypoxia, and the other pro-angiogenic factors, M2 macrophages release CXC- chemokines and MMPs, which directly promote angiogenesis through differentiation of endothelial cells. In this phase, angiogenesis is considered essential to facilitate cell migration, to meet the metabolic needs of the proliferating wound cells and to improve the synthesis of extracellular matrix compounds [
47,
48,
49,
55]. It has also previously been mentioned that some
Lactobacilli spps, such as
L. Plantarum Lp-115 [
27], have been reported to exert a significant up-regulation of NOS2, which facilitate endothelial cell recruitment to the ischemic wound. In a recent publication, Panagiotou et al [
16] reported that
L. plantarum UBLP-40 presents a step-by-step up-regulation of VEGF mRNA, up to day 8, when it exceeds the control value and then down-regulates. However,
L. rhamnosus UBLR-58 is presented as more active, significantly up-regulating both EGF and VEGF mRNA expression from Day 2, with no further fluctuation thereafter. In the same manner, Moreira et al found in
Lactobacillus rhamnosus CGMCC 1.3724 LPR treated mice an increased blood vessel density and increased VEGF levels, practically confirmed by an increase in blood flow assessed by laser Doppler velocimetry [
31]. At the clinical level, the topical application of
L. plantarum ATCC 10241 in chronic diabetic foot ulcers demonstrated a significantly increased angiogenesis after 21 days [
23], while mice treated with
Lactiplantibacillus plantarum MTCC 2621 revealed at histopathology an enhanced increase of angiogenesis on day 7 [
29]. Speaking of extremes,
B. longum UBBL-64 exerts the strongest expression of VEGF mRNA compared both to
L. rhamnosus UBLR-58 and much more to
L. plantarum UBLP-40 up to day 8, and then down-regulating, progressively [
16]; on the other hand,
S. boulardi was found, in a dose-dependent manner, to significantly inhibit VEGF-induced angiogenesis, both in cell culture and in vivo [
42].
Remodeling brings the wound healing process to an end. In this stage, lasting several weeks after injury, the granulating tissue matures and becomes a scar of high tensile strength, in parallel exerting higher resistance and flexibility. Matrix metalloproteases break down collagen III and replace it with collagen I, the primary collagen subtype in scar tissue, which further re-organizes into parallel fibrils, forming a low cellularity scar [
48,
52,
54,
56]. Since our data on probiotics is mainly based on cell cultures and excisional wound models in experimental animals, there is no published information on the long-term effects of probiotics in the healing process. Nevertheless, what remains extremely useful so far is that probiotics, each in its own way and to a different degree, contributes to faster healing; the speeding-up process teleologically working towards better maintaining the homeostasis of the injured organism and thus preventing the entry of bacteria into the open wound.