探讨基质细胞衍生因子-1α(SDF-1α)联合自体富血小板血浆(PRP)在小鼠皮肤损伤修复过程中的作用效果，并分析其作用机制。

选取6～8周龄健康C57小鼠24只，对24只小鼠分别抽取颈动脉血制备PRP；分别在每只小鼠脊柱2侧对称部位作直径为1.0 cm的圆形全层皮肤损伤创面，共建立48个创面，小鼠按随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组；每组各12只小鼠24个创面。48个创面均予PRP覆盖，观察组经皮下创面内予SDF-1α溶液(100 μg SDF-1α+100 μL 0.9%氯化钠溶液)从正常皮肤处经皮下注射至创面内，对照组同时采取同样方法注射200 μL 0.9%氯化钠溶液，均连续注射7 d，2次/d，12 h/次。采用酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)检测对比造模后第7、14、21天2组创面血小板内皮细胞生长因子(VEGF)和转化生长因子β1(TGF-β1)表达量，采用蛋白质免疫印迹法对比造模后第7、14天2组创面VEGF蛋白和Samd1蛋白表达量，对比2组造模后第7、14、21天创面收缩情况及创面愈合时间。数据进行t检验。

造模后第7、14天，观察组组织中VEGF含量分别为(0.66±0.07)、(0.49±0.07) pg/mL，均高于对照组[(0.45±0.05)、(0.45±0.06) pg/mL]，差异均有统计学意义(t＝10.83、2.25，P<0.05)；造模后第21天，观察组组织中VEGF含量[(0.44±0.06) pg/mL]和对照组[(0.43±0.06) pg/mL]相比，差异无统计学意义(t＝0.30，P>0.05)。造模后第7、14天，观察组组织中TGF-β1含量分别为(0.54±0.05)、(0.38±0.04) pg/mL，均高于对照组[(0.34±0.04、0.35±0.05) pg/mL]，差异均有统计学意义(t＝13.76、2.52，P<0.05)；造模后第21天，观察组组织中TGF-β1含量[(0.33±0.04) pg/mL]和对照组[(0.35±0.04) pg/mL]相比，差异无统计学意义(t＝-1.66，P>0.05)。造模后第7、14天，观察组VEGF蛋白均高于对照组，差异有统计学意义(t＝7.31、4.29，P<0.05)，观察组Samd1蛋白均高于对照组，差异有统计学意义(t＝2.74、11.13，P<0.05)。造模后第7、14天，观察组的创面愈合收缩率为(41.98±6.94)%、(75.23±10.41)%，与对照组[(36.93±7.59)%、(64.56±5.96)%]比较，差异均有统计学意义(t＝2.40、4.35，P<0.05)；造模后第21天，观察组创面愈合收缩率[(100.00±0.00) %]与对照组[(99.84±0.74) %]比较，差异无统计学意义(t＝1.00，P>0.05)。观察组创面愈合时间为(15.91±1.21) d，短于对照组[(18.95±1.33) d]，差异有统计学意义(t＝-8.26，P<0.05)。

SDF-1α联合PRP可以促进生长因子表达、调控TGF-β1-Samd信号通路促进创面愈合。

Twenty-four healthy C57 mice aged 6 to 8 weeks were selected and carotid blood was extracted from each mouse to prepare PRP gel. A total of 48 round full-thickness skin injury wounds with a diameter of 1.0 cm were made on 2 symmetrical parts of the spine of each mouse. The mice were divided into observation group and control group according to random number table method. There were 24 wounds, 12 mice in each group. All 48 wounds were covered with PRP gel. In the observation group, SDF-1α solution (100 μg SDF-1α+ 100 μL 0.9% sodium chloride solution) was injected subcutaneously into the wound from the normal skin. The control group was injected with 200 μL 0.9% sodium chloride solution. All the 48 wounds were injected continuously for 7 d, twice a day, 12 h a time.The expression levels of platelet endothelial cell growth factor (VEGF) and transforming growth factor (TGF-β1) in the wound of the two groups were measured and compared by enzyme-linked immunoadsordent assay (ELISA) at 7, 14 and 21 days after modeling.Western blotting was used to compare the expression levels of VEGF protein and SAMD1 protein in the two groups at 7, 14 and 21 days after modeling. Wound healing shrinkage rate at 7, 14 and 21 days after modeling and wound healing time were compared between the two groups. Data was processed with t test.

At 7, 14 days after modeling, the VEGF content in the observation group was (0.66±0.07, 0.49±0.07) pg/mL, which were higher than those in the control group [(0.45±0.05), (0.45±0.06) pg/mL], and the differences were statistically significant (t=10.83, 2.25; P<0.05). At 21 days after modeling, there was no significant difference in VEGF content between the observation group [(0.44±0.06) pg/mL] and the control group [(0.43±0.06) pg/mL] (t=0.30, P>0.05). At 7, 14 days after modeling, the content of TGF-β1 in the observation group was (0.54±0.05), (0.38±0.04) pg/mL, which were greater than those in the control group [(0.34±0.04), (0.35±0.04) pg/mL, and the differences were statistically significant (t=13.76, 2.52; P<0.05). At 21 days after modeling, there was no significant difference in TGF-β1 content between the observation group [(0.33±0.04) pg/mL] and control group [(0.35±0.05) pg/mL](t=-1.66, P>0.05). At 7, 14 days after modeling, VEGF protein in the observation group was higher than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (t=7.31, 4.29; P<0.05). At 7, 14 days after modeling, Samd1 protein in the observation group was higher than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (t=2.74, 11.13; P<0.05). At 7, 14 days after modeling, wound healing shrinkage rate in the observation group was (41.98±6.94) %, (75.23±10.41) %, which were significantly lower than those in the control group [(36.93±7.59) %, (64.56±5.96) %], the differences were statistically significant (t=2.40, 4.35; P<0.05). At 21 days after modeling, there was no significant difference in the wound healing shrinkage rate between the observation group [(100.00±0.00) %] and the control group [(99.84±0.74) %] (t=1.00, P>0.05). The wound healing time of the observation group was(15.91±1.21) d, which was shorter than that of the control group [(18.95±1.33) d], and the difference was statistically significant (t=-8.26, P<0.05).

SDF-1α combined with PRP can promote the expression of growth factors and regulate the TGFβ1-Samd signaling pathway to promote wound healing.