基质金属蛋白酶及其组织抑制因子在皮肤增生性瘢痕中的作用

目的探讨基质金属蛋白酶（MMPs）MMP2、MMP9及其抑制物（TIMPs）TIMP-1在皮肤增生性瘢痕中的作用。方法取3-6个月、6-12个月皮肤增生性瘢痕，以正常皮肤组织为对照，ELISA方法测定其MMP2、MMP9以及TIMP-1的含量，采用SPSS统计软件，以成组设计的单因素方差分析，分析它们在不同时段瘢痕组织中变化的意义。结果（1）3-6月瘢痕组织和6-12月瘢痕组织的MMP2，均较正常皮肤显著增高（110.70±5.23ng／ml VS 54.59±3.01，P〈0.01；77.23±7.10ng／ml VS 54.59±3.01，P〈0.01），而3-6月瘢痕组织的MMP2较6-12月瘢痕组织的MMP2亦有显著增高（110.70±5.23 VS 77．23±7．10，P〈0．01）；3-6月瘢痕组织和6-12月瘢痕组织的MMP9之间（3.85±0.88 VS 3.61±0.43，P〉0.05）以及它们与正常皮肤组织的MMP9相比（3.85±0.88 VS 4.13±0.33，P〉0.05；3.61±0.43 VS 4.13±0.33，P〉0.05）均无显著性差异；（2）3-6月瘢痕组织和6-12月瘢痕组织的TIMP-1与正常皮肤组织相比有显著增高（4．74±0．35 VS 3．01±0．11，P〈0．01；5．12±0．34 VS 3.01±0．11，P〈0．01），6-12月瘢痕组织较3-6月瘢痕组织的TIMP-1有显著增高（5.12±0.34 VS 4.74±0．35，P〈0．05）；（3）3-6月瘢痕组织和6-12月瘢痕组织的MMP2与TIMP-1的比值与正常皮肤组织相比均有显著增高（23．38±1．01 VS 18．15±0．58，P〈0.01；15.10±1.45 VS 18．15±0．58，P〈0．01），3-6月瘢痕组织较6-12月瘢痕组织的MMP2与TIMP-1的比值有显著降低（23.38±1.01 VS 15.10±1.45，P〈0.01）。结论MMPs以及TIMPs参与了皮肤瘢痕的增生过程，MMP2、TIMP-1含量及其比值可作为瘢痕生长和预后的指标。

Contents of matrix metalloproteinases and their inhibitors in scar

Objective To investigate the contents of matrix metalloproteinases and their inhibitors in scar. Methods Twenty-four scar samples were divided into 3 groups, 3-6 m group, 6-12 m group, and normal skin samples as a control group. The contents of MMP2, MMP9, TIMP-1 were tested by ELISA. The data were analyzed by ANOVA. Results The content of MMP2 in both 3-6 m group and 6-12 m group were higher significantly than that in control group （110.70±5.23 vs 54.59±3.01 ,P 〈 0.01 ;77.23±7.10 vs 54.59±3.01, P 〈0.01 ）. The content of MMP2 in 3-6 m group was significantly higher than that in 6-12 m group （ 110.70±5.23 vs 77.23±7.10,P 〈 0.01 ）. The content of MMP9 showed no significant difference between each two groups（ 3.85±0.88 vs 4.13± 0.33, P 〉 0.05; 3.61±0.43 vs 4.13±0.33, P 〉 0.05）. The content of TIMP-1 in both 3-6 m group and 6-12 m group were higher than that in control group （4.74±0.35 vs 3.01±0.11, P 〈 0.01 ; 5.12±0.34 vs 3.01±0.11, P 〈 0.01 ）. The content of TIMP-1 in 6-12 m group was significantly higher than that in 3-6 m group （ 5.12±0.34 vs 4.74±0.35, P 〈 0.05 ）. The value of MMP2/TIMP-1 in both 3-6 m group and 6-12 m group were significantly higher than that in control group （23.38±1.01 vs 18.15±0.58, P 〈0.01 ;15.10±1.45 vs 18.15±0.58,P 〈0.01）. But the value of MMP2/TIMP-1 in 3-6 m group was significantly lower than that in 6-12 m group （23.38±1.01 vs 15.10±1.45, P 〈0.01）. Conclusions MMP2 and TIMP-1 contribute to scar formation. Examining contents of MMP2, TIMP-1 and value of MMP2,TIMP-1 can be used in diagnosis and prognosis of scar growth.