ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Immunol.
Sec. Alloimmunity and Transplantation
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1672754
This article is part of the Research TopicMethods in Alloimmunity and Transplantation: 2025View all 8 articles
Differentiation of Acute versus Chronic Skin Rejection in a Rodent Model of Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation
Provisionally accepted- 1Department of Plastic and Hand Surgery, Medical Center and Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- 2Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Giessen-Marburg (UKGM), Site Marburg – Philipps-University Marburg, Medical Faculty of the University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany
- 3Orlando Health Aesthetic & Reconstructive Surgery Institute, Orlando, Florida, United States
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Vascularized composite allografts (VCA) have evolved to be a potential option in complex reconstructive surgery. However, managing acute and chronic allograft rejection remains challenging. This study underlines differences between acute and chronic rejection in skin based on Banff criteria using rodent VCA models, enhancing comprehension of the underlying immunopathology. Methods: We compared whole tissue sections of fresh frozen skin from a rat hindlimb allograft transplantation model of acute and chronic rejection, respectively (n=7), stained with Hematoxylin Eosin-, Periodic Acid Schiff-and Masson's Trichrome. Assessment followed the Banff 2007 working classification of skin-containing composite tissue allograft pathology, also considering the Banff 2022 VCA Working Group's consensus. Immune cell infiltration was further analyzed via immunofluorescence. Results: Histopathological criteria effectively distinguished both acute and chronic rejection from healthy control skin. However, substantial overlap was observed, including perivascular infiltrates. Chronic rejection presented distinct features such as band-like lymphohistiocytic infiltrates, loss of rete ridges and adnexal structures, fibrosis, vasculitis, and allograft vasculopathy. Immune cell infiltration increased in both rejection groups. Conclusion: This study validates the application of the updated Banff classification in rat VCA rejection models, highlighting overlapping and distinct features of acute and chronic rejection patterns. Clear differentiation between acute and chronic rejection remains challenging, as no single criterion provides absolute diagnostic certainty and multiple pathways with transitional forms are involved. In our cohort, allograft vasculopathy, loss of rete ridges, and band-like lymphohistiocytic infiltrates were the most distinctive features, underscoring the need for an integrative diagnostic approach. The findings reflect patterns seen in human chronic active rejection and underscore the need for further research to better understand the mechanisms driving sustained inflammation and tissue remodeling in VCA rejection.
Keywords: Vascularized composite allografts, allograft rejection, acute rejection, chronic rejection, Banff criteria, Rodent VCA Model
Received: 24 Jul 2025; Accepted: 15 Sep 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Thome, Lind, Schmitt, Schneider, Kiefer, Schäfer, Freise, Christmann, Kreuzaler, Kollár and Eisenhardt. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Julia Thome, julia.thome@uniklinik-freiburg.de
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.