• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Long-term and non-invasive in vivo tracking of DiD dye-labeled human hepatic progenitors in chronic liver disease models

    2022-11-29 07:58:40ChaturvedulaTripuraSrinivasGundaSandeepKumarVishwakarmaAvinashRajThatipalliJedyJoseMaheshKumarJeraldAleemAhmedKhanGopalPande
    World Journal of Hepatology 2022年10期

    Chaturvedula Tripura,Srinivas Gunda, Sandeep Kumar Vishwakarma, Avinash Raj Thatipalli, Jedy Jose,Mahesh Kumar Jerald,Aleem Ahmed Khan,Gopal Pande

    Abstract

    BACKGROUND

    Chronic liver diseases (CLD) are the major public health burden due to the continuous increasing rate of global morbidity and mortality. The inherent limitations of organ transplantation have led to the development of stem cell-based therapy as a supportive and promising therapeutic option. However, identifying the fate of transplanted cells in vivo represents a crucial obstacle.

    AIM

    To evaluate the potential applicability of DiD dye as a cell labeling agent for longterm, and non-invasive in vivo tracking of transplanted cells in the liver.

    METHODS

    Magnetically sorted, epithelial cell adhesion molecule positive (1 × 106 cells/mL) fetal hepatic progenitor cells were labeled with DiD dye and transplanted into the livers of CLD-severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) mice. Near-infrared (NIR) imaging was performed for in vivo tracking of the DiD-labeled transplanted cells along with colocalization of hepatic markers for up to 80 d. The existence of human cells within mouse livers was identified using Alu polymerase chain reaction and sequencing.

    RESULTS

    NIR fluorescence imaging of CLD-SCID mice showed a positive fluorescence signal of DiD at days 7, 15, 30, 45, 60, and 80 post-transplantation. Furthermore, positive staining of cytokeratin, c-Met, and albumin colocalizing with DiD fluorescence clearly demonstrated that the fluorescent signal of hepatic markers emerged from the DiD-labeled transplanted cells. Recovery of liver function was also observed with serum levels of glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase, glutamate-pyruvate transaminase, and bilirubin. The detection of human-specific Alu sequence from the transplanted mouse livers provided evidence for the survival of transplanted cells at day 80.

    CONCLUSION

    DiD-labeling is promising for long-term and non-invasive in vivo cell tracking, and understanding the regenerative mechanisms incurred by the transplanted cells.

    Key Words: Chronic liver diseases; Cell transplantation; Cell tracking and imaging; DiD; Hepatic progenitors

    INTRODUCTION

    Chronic liver diseases (CLD) represent one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, specifically in developing countries. They result from the progressive deterioration of liver functions which is caused by the continuous process of inflammation, destruction, and inadequate repair of the liver parenchyma leading to cirrhosis. Liver cirrhosis is characterized by irreversible distortion of the liver architecture in the form of fibrosis, scar formation, the occurrence of several regenerative nodules, vascular reorganization, and immense liver failure. The major aim of the current treatment approaches is to halt the progression of CLD into more severe forms, and further reduce the associated complications representing the need for an appropriate multidisciplinary approach. The clinical signs and symptoms of CLD can be nonspecific; hence the major management perceptions are the elimination of underlying causes, management of portal hypertension, and personalized therapy for each associated condition. Although such strategies provide temporary support to the failing liver; they cannot prevent long-term disease progression. Hence, more effective management approaches are required to overcome such hurdles and bridge the gap of a long-term therapeutic window to improve health-related quality of life.

    Cell therapy is an emerging technology and has shown significant promise in addressing the current demand for alternative options to liver transplantation to improve liver functions and act as a supportive bridge therapy in CLD[1,2]. However, it is necessary to ascertain appropriate cell types from widely acceptable sources and resolve several unanswered questions before utilizing cell-based technology in the clinical setting. Since the last two decades, transplantation of different types of cells from various tissue sources such as autologous bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), and allogenic fetal hepatic progenitor cells (fHPCs) have shown promising outcomes in clinical studies of CLD[3-7]. In addition, several preclinical studies have also demonstrated the potential applicability of such approaches in immune-compromised/deficient mice to improve the current understanding of the safety, efficacy, and functionality of human stem/progenitor cells post-transplantation[8-11]. While several of these studies have proved the safety and involvement of the transplanted cells in liver recovery, the availability of methods for easy and long-term tracking of infused cells would be extremely beneficial in determining their viability, bio-distribution, homing, and differentiation which represents a major roadblock for cell-based therapies in clinical settings.

    The majority of existing strategies employ radioisotopes, magnetic particles, fluorescent tags, or reporter genes as cell labeling agents prior to transplantation in preclinical settings[12]. Furthermore, non-invasive radionuclide imaging methods such as single-photon emission tomography and positron emission tomography using radionuclides [Technetium (99mTc) and111In-oxine] are currently employed in clinical settings[4,6,13]. However, the short life of radionuclides limits their wider applicability due to monitoring of the immediate cellular behavior for only a few hours. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is another non-invasive imaging method that has been explored for cell tracing in preclinical CLD models for up to 1-2 wk[14,15]. While MRI offers good spatial resolution and contrast, it is less sensitive and is not effective for follow-up studies due to the gradual loss of signal intensity[12]. Hence, several other tracking methods based on reporter gene expressions, such as fluorescence imaging and bioluminescence imaging are being successfully employed for monitoring the fate of transplanted cells in animal models of liver injury[16,17]. Although this method enables long-term cell tracking, the safety concerns owing to genetic manipulation represent a major hurdle for clinical translation. Hence, direct labeling of the cells without involving genetic manipulation represents a crucial need for a sensitive, relatively safer, and less cumbersome process for tracking transplanted cells in both preclinical and clinical settings.

    In the present study, long-term and non-invasive tracking of transplanted fHPCs was evaluated in an experimental severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) mouse model of CLD using DiD. DiD is a carbocyanine dye having good photochemical properties of strong fluorescence, and stability[18-20]. It is a cationic dye and belongs to the family of lipid intercalating long alkyl side-chain carbocyanine derivatives that have a long-range (540-780 nm) emission. Due to the long-range emission, tissue autofluorescence of DiD is minimum, permitting the use of other fluorochromes such as fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) for co-localization studies to evaluate the expression of other essential markers specific to transplanted cells in the recipient tissue. Moreover, the process of labeling the cells using DiD is easy due to its excellent efficiency for integration and diffusion into the cell membranes[18,19,21,22]. Although DiD is insoluble in water, its fluorescence is readily detected when incorporated into the cell membranes. Therefore, it has been classified as one of the most appropriate carbocyanine families of dyes in cell labeling and tracking. After incorporation into cell membranes, it diffuses laterally within the plasma membranes, resulting in staining of the entire cell. Structural similarity with the cell membrane phospholipids and prolonged dye retention within the cells are among the major advantages of DiD for live organisms. Hence, DiD has been used for labeling different types of cells without interfering with cellular differentiation; however, the effects of DiD labeling on human liver cells and its effect on the in vivo retention of labeled human liver cells remain to be investigated.

    We specifically utilized magnetically sorted fHPCs using epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) as a surface marker due to its associated crucial functions such as cell-to-cell adhesion, proliferation, maintenance of pluripotent state, and regulation of differentiation and migration[23]. It has also been demonstrated that EpCAM-positive HPCs are highly proliferative and have diminished class II MHC presentation, and are classified as immature cells suitable for regenerative applications[24]. In our earlier study, EpCAM-positive fHPCs revealed a significant improvement in liver functions and increased disease-free life span in patients with end-stage CLD[6]. Thus, using EpCAM-positive fHPCs could highlight how good DiD is for long-term, non-invasive, and real-time monitoring of cell survival, and structural and functional improvements in preclinical models of CLD post-transplantation. Accordingly, the present study aimed to shed light on the fate of DiD-labeled human liver cells in CLDSCID mice using live imaging up to 80 d post-transplantation.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Animals

    Experimental animals were obtained from inbred colonies of SCID mice (strain: NOD.CB17-Prkdcscid/J) and maintained at the animal facility of the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, India. This study was approved by the Institutional Animal Ethics Committee (Animal trial registration number 20/1999/CPCSEA dated 10/03/1999) of CCMB. All the animal experimental procedures were performed in accordance with the approved ethical guidelines of CCMB for the care and use of animals. All the animals were maintained in standard ventilated cages with a 12 h light-dark cycle and were fed ad libitum.

    Development of the CLD mousemodel

    CLD mouse model was generated using 25% carbon tetrachloride (CCl4, Rankem, India) diluted with mineral oil (Sigma, United States). A sub-lethal dose of diluted CCl4was administered according to 125 μL/kg body weight in each animal. A total of 26 mice (either sex) at eight weeks of age were randomly assigned to the vehicle control group (n = 4) and the CCl4group (n = 22). The CCl4group received intraperitoneal injections of diluted CCl4twice a week for 4 wk and the vehicle control mice received only mineral oil. After 4 wk, liver damage was confirmed by changes in liver enzymes and liver tissue histology. For the biochemical evaluation of liver damage, 100-150 μL of blood was collected by orbital sinus puncture. Serum levels of total bilirubin, glutamate-pyruvate transaminase (SGPT), and glutamicoxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT) were measured by the Jendrassik-Grof and Reitman-Frankel’s methods, respectively, using kits (Coral Clinical Systems, India). The mice after 4 wk of CCl4(referred to as CLD-SCID mice) were ready for cell transplantation (TX).

    Isolation of human fetal hepatic progenitors

    The total fetal liver cells (tFLCs) isolation protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of Deccan College of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad. Informed consent was obtained prior to sample collection, and cell processing was performed according to the ethical guidelines for the use of human cells. Briefly, the whole liver was dissected from spontaneously aborted fetuses (n = 3, 10-12 wk gestation), and perfused twice with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) for 5 min to eliminate circulating peripheral blood cells, followed by digestion with 0.025% collagenase in 1× PBS for 5 min at room temperature. Then the liver tissue was minced with a scalpel blade and disintegrated into a singlecell suspension by passing through 40 μm cell strainers (BD Biosciences, United States). Cell viability and counting were performed using the trypan blue dye exclusion test.

    Flow cytometry

    For flow cytometry analysis, a single cell suspension of 2 × 106tFLCs was fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde for 15 min at room temperature. Following fixation, the cells were washed twice with 1× PBS and stained with anti-human EpCAM (CD326) antibody conjugated with FITC (Miltenyi Biotech, Germany) for 30 min. Cells were washed once with 1× PBS before analyzing on FACS CaliburTM(BD Biosciences, United States) using 488 nm argon laser emission at 530/30 BP filter. The data were analyzed and plotted using Kaluza software 1.5a (Beckman Coulter Inc., United States).

    Enrichment of EpCAM-positive fHPCs from tFLCs

    To isolate EpCAM-positive cells, a 5 × 107tFLC suspension in 500 μL buffer containing FCR blocking reagent was incubated with anti-human EpCAM antibody (Miltenyi Biotech, Germany) conjugated with magnetic beads at 4°C for 30 min and sorted using the magnetic cell sorter, AutoMACS according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Miltenyi Biotech, Germany). Magnetically activated cell sorting (MACS) enriched EpCAM-positive cells were collected and resuspended in RPMI 1640 medium (Sigma, United States) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS, Sigma, United States). Cell isolation and MACS sorting procedures were carried out under sterile conditions in a Class 100 biosafety cabinet.

    Immunocytochemistry

    MACS-sorted EpCAM-positive cells were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde, and cytospin preparations were conducted on “Probe-on-Plus” slides (Fisher Scientific, United States). Cells were blocked with 10% goat serum, and stained with mouse monoclonal anti-human EpCAM antibodies directly conjugated with FITC (Miltenyi Biotech, Germany), and co-stained with either anti-cytokeratin (CK) 8+18+19 or anti-c-Met (Abcam Inc., MA, United States) primary antibodies. Alexa 594 (Molecular Probes, United States) was used as the secondary antibody. Images were captured using a confocal laser scanning microscope (Leica, Germany, SP2 AOBS).

    DiD-labeling and intra-hepatic cell TX in SCID-CLD mice

    MACS sorted EpCAM-positive cells (1 × 106cells/mL) in Hank’s buffered salt solution (HBSS) were labeled with DiD dye by adding 5 μL of DiD cell labeling solution (Life Technologies, Eugene, United States) to the cell suspension and incubating for 20 min at 37°C. DiD-labeled cells were washed thrice with HBSS, and resuspended in the same buffer. 1 × 105cells (100 μL) were injected directly into the liver lobes of the CLD mice (n = 14) at a single site using a 26-gauge needle. CLD mice receiving plain HBSS buffer served as non-transplanted (non-TX) controls (n = 5). Post-transplantation, mice were maintained in different cages, imaged, and sacrificed at different time points.

    Long-term in vivo and ex vivo imaging

    DiD-specific fluorescence from the transplanted animals was detected on the Multispectral FXPRO Fluorescence Imager (Carestream-KODAK, United States) using 630 nm excitation and 670/30 BP emission filters. Highly sensitive fluorescence images were combined with the high resolution X-ray images to precisely locate the DiD-labeled cells. Animals were imaged prior to TX (0 d) and after 7, 15, 30, 45, 60, and 80 d, post-TX. For each imaging experiment, the animals were anaesthetized with Xylazine (5 mg/kg body weight) and Ketamine (25 mg/kg body weight), the abdominal hair was shaved, placed within the chamber, and imaged. After in vivo imaging at days 15, 30, and 80 post-TX, mice were sacrificed, liver tissues were excised, and imaged (ex vivo imaging) to locate the fluorescing lobe for further processing. The fluorescing area of the liver lobe at day 15 and day 80 was immersed in OCT mounting solution and stored at -80°C. Liver lobes of the non-TX mice were randomly selected and processed similarly. The liver lobes at day 30 post-TX were processed for paraffin embedding and histology.

    Histology analysis

    The excised liver lobes were fixed in 10% buffered formalin and processed for paraffin embedding. Paraffin-embedded liver tissues were sectioned at 4.0 μm thickness using a rotatory microtome (Leica RM2135, Germany), and stained with Hematoxylin and Eosin, and Sirius Red (Sigma-Aldrich, United States) using standard protocols. Bright-field images were acquired from both control and CLD mice (n = 3) at 10× and 40× using an Olympus inverted microscope (IX3-SSU, Tokyo, Japan). A total of 20-25 random fields captured with the 10× objective was used to calculate the total collagen area using Image J (1.5 2q) software, and expressed as total collagen percent area (% CPA).

    Immunostaining

    Serial cryosections (7.0 μm thick) of transplanted and non-transplanted mouse liver lobes at 15 and 80 d were stained to determine the expression of hepatic markers using anti-CK, anti-c-Met, and anti-human albumin (MP Biomedicals) primary antibodies, and detected with Alexa 488 (Molecular Probes, United States) secondary antibody. Images were captured using either a confocal laser scanning microscope (Leica, Germany, SP2 AOBS), or the Axioimager Z2 Fluorescence microscope (Zeiss, Germany).

    Alu sequence analysis

    DNA was isolated from the fHPCs prior to transplantation and from the liver tissues of transplanted and non-transplanted mice at day 80. Isolated DNA was analyzed using human-specific primers for Alu sequence (Forward primer 5’-GGCGCGGTGGCTCACG-3’, Reverse primer 5’-TTTTTTGAGACGGAGTCTCGCTC-3’). Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed in a 25 μL reaction mixture containing 1 μL DNA, 2.5 μL 10× complete PCR Buffer with MgCl2, 1 μL of 10 mmol/L dNTPs, 0.5 μL forward and 0.5 μL reverse primers, and 0.2 μL Taq DNA Polymerase (5 U/mL) with an initial denaturation step of 94°C for 5 min, followed by 35 cycles of a three-step program of 94°C for 30 s, 54°C for 30 s and 72°C for 45 s, followed by a final extension step at 72°C for 5 min. The PCR products were electrophoresed on a 2% agarose gel and observed under UV with ethidium bromide staining. The images were captured using the Gel Documentation System (BIO-RAD, United States). The PCR product was cleaned using QIAquick Gel Extraction Kit (Qiagen, United States), and sequenced. The amplicon sequences were analyzed using the ClustalW2 online tool (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/msa/clustalw2/).

    Statistical analysis

    All statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism software (ver. 5.0). Data are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean. Paired Student t-test at 95% confidence interval for a P value of ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

    RESULTS

    The schematic representation in Figure 1 shows the different steps involved in measuring different outcomes throughout the study process. Isolated tFLCs were enriched for EpCAM-positive cells by MACS in step 1 (Figure 1A), labeled with DiD dye in step 2 (Figure 1B), and then transplanted into CLD mouse livers (Figure 1C). Furthermore, live non-invasive near-infrared (NIR) imaging was performed at regular intervals using a small animal imaging system to detect the fluorescence signal (Figure 1D). However, ex vivo imaging of the excised liver was performed to confirm the localization of the fluorescence in mice liver post-TX (Figure 1E).

    Immunophenotyping of tFLCs to identify the proportion of fHPCs

    Human tFLCs stained with FITC-tagged anti-CD326 (EpCAM) antibodies were analyzed using flow cytometry. The gating strategy and the analysis of cell fluorescence vs cell size, and the overlaid histogram of the unstained and EpCAM-stained cells were acquired (Figure 2A and B). Of these tFLCs, 49 ± 23% of cells were found to be EpCAM positive and designated as fHPCs.

    NIR imaging of DiD-labeled EpCAM-positive cells in vitro

    MACS-sorted EpCAM-positive fHPCs were characterized for the expression of specific hepatic cell markers such as CK and c-Met together with EpCAM (Figure 2C). Magnetically sorted EpCAM-positive cells which were labeled with DiD dye showed a separate peak corresponding to the DiD fluorescence (Figure 2D). Furthermore, before transplantation, the DiD-labeled EpCAM-positive cells in the tube were visualized for fluorescence in the multispectral imaging system. The overlay image of the NIR fluorescence and X-ray showed a positive signal only in the tube containing DiD-labeled cells, while the tube with non-labeled cells was devoid of any such fluorescence (Figure 2E).

    Figure 1 Schematic presentation of the study. A: Total fetal liver cells were enriched for EpCAM-positive cells by magnetically activated cell sorting; B: Cells were labeled with DiD and visualized in the tube by near-infrared imaging as red fluorescence; C: Cells were intra-hepatically transplanted into injured livers of severe combined immunodeficiency mice; D: In vivo imaging of live animals was performed at specified time points; E: Ex vivo imaging of liver confirmed the retention of DiD-labeled transplanted cells in the liver. EpCAM: Epithelial cell adhesion molecule; SCID: Severe combined immunodeficiency; MACS: Magnetic activated cell sorting.

    Long-term tracking of DiD-labeled cells post-TX in CLD-SCID mice

    Assessment of the biochemical and histological changes in CLD-SCID mice showed an increase in serum parameters (SGOT, SGPT, and bilirubin), and collagen accumulation compared to the control animals, confirming liver injury after 4 wk of CCl4injection (Supplementary Figure 1). These CLD mice were utilized for cell transplantation (at day 0), and tracking through in vivo imaging on different days from day 0 to day 80 (Figure 3A). NIR fluorescence imaging of CLD-SCID mice before intra-hepatic transplantation of DiD-labeled fHPCs cells at day 0 did not show fluorescence, while mice at days 7, 15, 30, 45, 60, and 80 post-TX showed a positive fluorescence signal of DiD (Figure 3B). The overlay images showed DiD fluorescence in the upper part of the abdominal cavity near the rib cage, suggesting that the cells continue to localize in the liver lobes until day 80 post-TX. The non-TX mouse abdomen lacked such fluorescence signals (Figure 3C). To further confirm the localization, the liver was excised on day 15 and day 80 post-TX, and ex vivo imaging was performed which confirmed the localization of DiD-labeled cells within the mice livers (Figure 3D). These results indicated that DiD-labeled cells can be efficiently visualized and tracked for a longer duration post-TX both in vivo and ex vivo.

    Figure 2 Flow cytometry characterization of epithelial cell adhesion molecule expressing fetal hepatic progenitors, and DiD labeling of magnetically activated cell sorting enriched epithelial cell adhesion molecule-positive cells. A and B: Total fetal liver progenitors were stained with epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM)-fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) antibody and the representative dot plots of (A) unstained and EpCAM (CD326) stained cells and (B) overlay histogram; C: Colocalization of pan CK and c-Met with EpCAM-FITC expression (Scale bar = 10 μm); D: Overlay histogram of magnetically sorted EpCAM-positive cells labeled with DiD; E: Near-infrared fluorescence imaging and X-ray overlay image of DiD-labeled and unlabeled EpCAM-positive cells in the tube. EpCAM: Epithelial cell adhesion molecule; NIR: Near-infrared; DAPI: 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole; MACS: Magneticallyactivated cell sorting.

    Figure 3 Long-term in vivo tracking of transplanted cells. A: Schematic representation showing the timeline for cell transplantation in mice with chronic liver diseases, imaging, and animal sacrifice; B: In vivo near-infrared (NIR)-fluorescence images (top panel) overlay with X-ray images (lower panel) of mice posttransplantation at indicated time periods; C: NIR-fluorescence image overlay with X-ray image of non-transplanted control mice (hair autofluorescence can be seen);D: Ex vivo imaging of excised livers of non-transplant control mice and transplanted mice at 15 and 80 d post-transplantation.

    Co-expression of hepatic markers with DiD in the transplanted mouse livers

    To evaluate the expression of hepatic markers in transplanted cells, frozen mouse liver sections were obtained from the portion of the liver that displayed a DiD-positive fluorescence signal at day 15 and day 80 post-TX. Serial sections of the liver transplanted with DiD-labeled fHPCs and non-transplanted control mice were obtained and stained for CK and c-Met (Figures 4 and 5). The presence of DiD fluorescence only in the transplanted mice confirmed the existence of transplanted cells, while nontransplanted mice did not show DiD fluorescence in liver tissue sections. In addition, positive staining for both CK (Figures 4A, 5A and 5C) and c-Met (Figures 4B, 5B and 5D) colocalization with DiD fluorescence clearly demonstrated that the fluorescent signal of the hepatic markers, CK and c-Met emerged from the DiD-labeled transplanted cells.

    Figure 4 Co-expression of hepatic markers in the transplanted livers 15 d post-transplantation. Confocal images of liver tissue cryosections of transplanted (TX-15 d) and non-transplanted (No-TX) mice showing expression of CK and c-Met colocalization with DiD-labeling only in the transplanted mice. The non-transplanted mouse livers were negative for CK, c-Met and DiD (Scale bar = 25 μm). A: CK: cytokeratin; B: c-Met; DAPI: 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole.

    Figure 5 Detection of hepatic markers in transplanted mouse livers 80 d post-transplantation. A and B: Fluorescent microscopic images of mouse liver tissue cryosections that continue to show DiD signals 80 d post-transplantation and show co-expression of CK and c-Met only in the transplanted (TX-80 d)mouse livers, but not in the non-transplanted (No-TX) livers (scale bar = 50 μm); C and D: 63 × images showing the colocalization of CK and c-Met staining with DiD labeling, respectively (Scale bar = 50 μm and 10 μm). CK: cytokeratin; DAPI: 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole.

    Tracing the effect of transplanted DiD-labeled cells through improved liver function parameters

    After 15 d of transplantation, recovery of mouse liver function was analyzed by assaying liver enzymes SGOT, SGPT, and bilirubin. Serum SGOT and SGPT levels were significantly reduced in the transplanted mice compared to the non-transplanted mice (Figure 6A), while serum bilirubin was reduced to normal levels in both groups. Thus, the serum enzyme parameters suggested improved liver function in the transplanted mice compared to the non-transplanted mice. Furthermore, the lower collagen percentage area in transplanted mice compared to the non-transplanted mice suggested that this recovery may be attributed to the transplanted fHPCs (Figure 6B and C).

    Figure 6 Liver enzyme and histology assessment of improved liver function parameters. A: Analysis of serum bilirubin, serum glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase, (SGOT) and serum glutamate-pyruvate transaminase (SGPT) measured 15 d post-transplantation (TX) and compared to the non-transplanted (No-TX)mice (n = 4); B and C: Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) and Sirius Red staining of liver tissue sections of non-transplanted and transplanted mouse liver tissue at 30 d post-transplantation showed a significant decrease in collagen percent area in the transplanted mouse livers as compared to the non-transplanted mouse livers (aP <0.001). H&E: Hematoxylin and Eosin; SR: Sirius Red.

    The above assumption was further confirmed by the positive expression of hu-ALB in CLD-SCID mouse liver cells at day 80 post-TX (Figure 7). ALB-positive cells were also tested for their colocalization with DiD to confirm the effect was only in labeled cells. The non-transplanted mouse livers tested negative for ALB staining. The presence of hu-ALB only in the livers of transplanted mice, but not in the non-transplanted mice further confirmed the differentiation of fHPCs into functional hepatocytes (Figure 7). In addition, the amplification and detection of human-specific Alu-sequence from the transplanted mouse livers provided molecular evidence for the continued presence of human fetal liver cells in mouse liver at day 80. Sequencing analysis of the amplified Alu gene confirmed the presence of human Alu gene sequence in mouse liver tissues (Supplementary Figure 2). These results suggest that the transplanted human EpCAM-positive DiD-labeled cells continue to survive long-term without eliciting serious unfavorable effects in CLD-SCID mice.

    DISCUSSION

    This study reports a new application of the lipophilic fluorescent dye DiD for non-invasive in vivo imaging to monitor transplanted fHPCs in SCID mice with CLD. In our earlier clinical study, transplanted fHPCs in end-stage CLD patients were tracked for only 24 h using radio-labeled99mTc-HMPAO post-TX[6]. In our current study, labeling of fHPCs with DiD enabled long-term in vivo monitoring of the transplanted cells, which was further confirmed by ex vivo imaging and immunohistological analysis. Using DiD as a cell label, the transplanted cells could be tracked for 80 d non-invasively in CLD-SCID mouse liver. Our findings revealed that DiD labeling is a relatively simple, safe, and effective approach for long-term and non-invasive tracking of fHPCs post-TX in mouse liver. In addition, our results also showed the efficacy of transplanted human fHPCs as a suitable cell type for improving liver functions similar to earlier studies[11,25].

    Long-term in vivo tracking of transplanted cells is currently required to answer several concerns and to reduce existing controversies in cell-based therapies. Now, it has been identified as an essential component of cell-based therapeutic strategies for optimizing the cell number, route of delivery, biodistribution, cell viability post-transplantation, and evaluating the regenerative capabilities, which would aid in accelerating their clinical applications[26]. The depth of penetration, sensitivity, spatial and temporal resolution, ease of availability of the molecular probe, and cost of imaging are some of the important factors to be considered for a suitable imaging approach[26]. Direct labeling of the transplanted cells with fluorescent dyes has been demonstrated in several animal liver disease models to understand their homing and differentiation. For instance, the fluorescent dye PKH26 was used in a CCl4-induced liver injury model in rats to show stem cell migration, proliferation, and expression of liver-specific markers[27,28]. However, these studies did not involve live cell tracking, and only postmortem analysis of the liver tissue sections was performed to identify the presence of labeled cells. Also, due to the potential cross-transfer of the dye to host cells, PKH26 was not considered ideal as a cell tracer, thus limiting its application in transplantation studies[29].

    The carbocyanine dyes, CM-DiI, and DiR have been used to label transplanted cells in animal models of liver injury. Although both CM-DiI and DiR proved to be safe for cell tracking applications, monitoring has only been demonstrated in ex vivo settings[30], or if in vivo, the signal was reported to have faded within 5 d after infusion[22]. Hence, the above carbocyanine dyes have not provided sufficient evidence of their long-term applicability for cell tracking in vivo. In contrast, DiD has been demonstrated to be effective for long-term monitoring of labeled neuronal and cancer cells in vitro for up to 4 wk[31,32]. Moreover, DiD at higher concentrations of up to 2 μM also does not affect cell growth, proliferation, migration, and apoptosis, and does not cross-transfer to neighboring cells[33]. In line with this, DiD-labeled MSCs have demonstrated the absence of cytotoxicity and signs of altered functional performance in terms of cytokine production or trilineage differentiation[34], thus assuring the safety of DiD for potential applicability in stem cell tracking. DiD-labeled neural stem cells have also shown promising results following direct injection into the cerebrospinal fluid in vivo[35]. Also, among the Vybrant?dye series (DiR, DiI, CM-DiI, DiD), DiD has demonstrated comparatively high intense fluorescence[32]. Thus, these observations support our choice of DiD for cell labeling and long-term in vivo imaging.

    In the present study, DiD did not show any interference with tissue autofluorescence and FITC due to fluorescence emission close to the NIR region. The quick and easy methodology of staining, nontoxicity, no interference with the functionality of the labeled cells, non-diffusion to adjacent cells, and lack of photo-bleaching were identified as the major advantages of DiD labeling. Furthermore, colocalization of CK and c-Met hepatic markers with the DiD-labeled transplanted cells in the recipient mouse livers showed the long-term persistence of transplanted cells. These observations support the involvement of selected markers in supporting the proliferation, survival, and differentiation of transplanted cells in the recipient’s liver regeneration and functional improvements[36-38]. In addition, the detection of hu-ALB-specific expression within the transplanted mouse livers further confirmed that the transplanted fHPCs not only persisted for the longer duration but also differentiated into functional hepatocytes contributing to liver regeneration and functional recovery. In addition, fHPCs successfully attenuated liverfibrosis in mouse liver. However, future studies could aid in deciphering the detailed molecular mechanisms by which fHPCs contribute to liver repair and regeneration.

    Overall, the results from our study were supportive of the use of DiD in long-term, non-invasive, in vivo tracking of fHPCs in the recipient’s liver, but there are certain limitations. Although the results indicate the suitability of DiD for monitoring transplanted fHPCs in the liver, quantification of the signal to correlate the cell number or survival was not reported. Future studies using a larger cohort of animals, varying cell numbers, and quantification of the signal intensity in relation to cell doses would be very useful to understand the efficacy and survival. Moreover, optimizing the route of cell delivery, and assessing the dynamic changes in the expression of EpCAM over time will help in addressing the questions on engraftment and differentiation of fHPCs. Lastly, DiD has been proven to be safe and nontoxic with no effect on the metabolic functioning of cells in vitro. However, for regular in vivo imaging applications of DiD, it is essential to evaluate the metabolic cycle of the dye for long-term use. Addressing such issues would make DiD labeling more valuable for wider in vivo cell tracking applications.

    CONCLUSION

    Monitoring the fate of transplanted cells through in vivo tracking or imaging can help in understanding the homing, engraftment, long-term survival, and function of the transplanted cells. In this preclinical study, DiD-labeled fHPCs showed efficient long-term cell tracking for up to 80 d. The ease of handling, non-toxicity, and long-term signal retention proved to be major advantages in using DiD as a cell labeling agent for non-invasive, long-term tracking of cells both in vivo and ex vivo. These findings could pave the way to unravel the underlying regenerative mechanisms and contribution of exogenously transplanted cells in restoring the structural and functional deficits of the liver in CLD.

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research results

    This study showed that DiD labeling of human liver cells is easy and efficient for long-term and noninvasive tracking in vivo up to 80 d post-transplantation. Using DiD, the fate of transplanted cells was determined. Transplanted human fetal liver cells were able to provide structural and functional improvement in CLD-SCID mice.

    Research conclusions

    Monitoring the fate of transplanted cells through DiD-based in vivo live cell imaging can help in understanding the homing, engraftment, long-term survival, and function of the transplanted cells.

    Research perspectives

    The findings of the current study may pave the way to unravel the underlying regenerative mechanisms and contribution of exogenously transplanted cells in restoring the structural and functional deficits of the liver in CLD.

    FOOTNOTES

    Author contributions: Khan AA, Pande G, and Tripura C were responsible for the study concept, design, and supervision; Thatipalli AR, Vishwakarma SK, Jose J, and Jerald MK performed the experiments; Tripura C, and Gunda S were responsible for data acquisition and analysis; Tripura C also performed data organization and manuscript writing; Tripura C, Vishwakarma SK, Khan AA, and Pande G performed editing and revision of the manuscript draft.

    Supported by Department of Science and Technology (DST), Ministry of Science and Technology, Govt. of India and Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), New Delhi, Govt. of India Grants to GP, No. GAP-0220 and No. GAP-0383.

    Institutional review board statement: The total fetal liver cells (tFLCs) isolation protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) of Deccan College of Medical Sciences (DCMS), Hyderabad.

    Institutional animal care and use committee statement: The study was approved by the Institutional Animal Ethics Committee (Animal trial registration number 20/1999/CPCSEA dated 10/03/1999) of CCMB.

    Informed consent statement: Informed consent was obtained prior to sample collection, and cell processing was performed according to the ethical guidelines for the use of human cells.

    Conflict-of-interest statement: Dr. Tripura reports grants from the Department of Science and Technology (DST, Ministry of Science and Technology, Govt. of India and Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), New Delhi, Govt. of India Grants No. GAP-0220 and No. GAP-0383 to GP during the study period.

    Data sharing statement: Data will be shared on request.

    ARRIVE guidelines statement: The authors have read the ARRIVE guidelines, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the ARRIVE guidelines.

    Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BYNC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is noncommercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/

    Country/Territory of origin: India

    ORCID number: Chaturvedula Tripura 0000-0003-2766-0861; Srinivas Gunda 0000-0003-2053-2330; Sandeep Kumar Vishwakarma 0000-0001-5731-8210; Avinash Raj Thatipalli 0000-0001-6985-3990; Jedy Jose 0000-0003-3155-5386; Aleem Ahmed Khan 0000-0001-7075-9037; Gopal Pande 0000-0002-0730-1389.

    S-Editor: Fan JR

    L-Editor: Webster JR

    P-Editor: Cai YX

    久久九九热精品免费| 窝窝影院91人妻| 精品久久久噜噜| 免费观看精品视频网站| 免费在线观看日本一区| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看 | 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 国产色婷婷99| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看 | 真实男女啪啪啪动态图| av中文乱码字幕在线| 国产淫片久久久久久久久| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 春色校园在线视频观看| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 搞女人的毛片| 日本免费a在线| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6 | h日本视频在线播放| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 亚洲国产欧洲综合997久久,| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 国产综合懂色| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 不卡一级毛片| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 亚洲精品456在线播放app | 久久久色成人| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| aaaaa片日本免费| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 精品午夜福利在线看| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久 | 美女高潮的动态| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 春色校园在线视频观看| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 国产69精品久久久久777片| www日本黄色视频网| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区 | a在线观看视频网站| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区 | 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| 又爽又黄无遮挡网站| 精品一区二区免费观看| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 草草在线视频免费看| 亚洲精品456在线播放app | 国产视频内射| 日本色播在线视频| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 一区二区三区四区激情视频 | 床上黄色一级片| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 丰满的人妻完整版| 国产在线男女| 免费人成视频x8x8入口观看| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 一级av片app| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 国产亚洲欧美98| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 特级一级黄色大片| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看 | 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| aaaaa片日本免费| 久久久久久久久久黄片| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 亚洲国产色片| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 免费av观看视频| 毛片女人毛片| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 尾随美女入室| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久 | 国产综合懂色| 99久国产av精品| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 久久午夜福利片| 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 午夜福利18| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 午夜福利欧美成人| 在线国产一区二区在线| 日韩高清综合在线| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看 | 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 波多野结衣高清作品| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看 | 午夜免费成人在线视频| 99热只有精品国产| 露出奶头的视频| 亚洲成人久久性| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 免费人成在线观看视频色| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 搡老岳熟女国产| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 有码 亚洲区| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 在线天堂最新版资源| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 日日撸夜夜添| 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 毛片女人毛片| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 两个人的视频大全免费| 成人欧美大片| 国产中年淑女户外野战色| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 联通29元200g的流量卡| 最近在线观看免费完整版| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 赤兔流量卡办理| 热99re8久久精品国产| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 精品人妻视频免费看| 国产毛片a区久久久久| 亚洲图色成人| 亚洲va在线va天堂va国产| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 久久99热6这里只有精品| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 少妇高潮的动态图| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 毛片女人毛片| 露出奶头的视频| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 毛片女人毛片| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 午夜福利18| 欧美区成人在线视频| 窝窝影院91人妻| 欧美3d第一页| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 久久精品人妻少妇| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 久久久久久久久久久丰满 | xxxwww97欧美| 免费人成视频x8x8入口观看| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 22中文网久久字幕| 内射极品少妇av片p| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 国产成人aa在线观看| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 国产精华一区二区三区| 嫩草影院精品99| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆 | 免费看a级黄色片| .国产精品久久| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添小说| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 国产精品久久久久久久电影| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 成人三级黄色视频| 免费av毛片视频| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 嫩草影院新地址| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 99久久精品热视频| 午夜福利18| 国产高潮美女av| 国产毛片a区久久久久| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 一进一出抽搐动态| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 嫩草影院精品99| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 亚洲av一区综合| 在线免费十八禁| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 在线国产一区二区在线| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 久久热精品热| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件 | 国产久久久一区二区三区| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 毛片女人毛片| 国产精品久久视频播放| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 男人舔奶头视频| 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 黄色一级大片看看| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| h日本视频在线播放| 美女黄网站色视频| 嫩草影院精品99| avwww免费| 欧美性感艳星| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 国产免费男女视频| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 少妇的逼好多水| 免费人成视频x8x8入口观看| 国产在视频线在精品| 1000部很黄的大片| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 国产视频内射| 国产探花极品一区二区| 悠悠久久av| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 床上黄色一级片| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 国产视频内射| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 国产高清激情床上av| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| 中国美女看黄片| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 久久6这里有精品| 一个人免费在线观看电影| or卡值多少钱| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 国产成人福利小说| 亚洲内射少妇av| 久久久久久久久大av| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 日韩欧美精品v在线| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 九九在线视频观看精品| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 99久久成人亚洲精品观看| 国产在视频线在精品| 九色国产91popny在线| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| 午夜久久久久精精品| 国产高清三级在线| 免费观看精品视频网站| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 色综合婷婷激情| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 日韩欧美在线二视频| av黄色大香蕉| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 啦啦啦观看免费观看视频高清| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 看黄色毛片网站| 伦精品一区二区三区| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 欧美日韩黄片免| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 久久这里只有精品中国| 香蕉av资源在线| 亚洲av成人av| 日韩强制内射视频| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 中国美女看黄片| 久9热在线精品视频| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 免费看光身美女| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 日日啪夜夜撸| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 少妇丰满av| 精品午夜福利在线看| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 色播亚洲综合网| 男人和女人高潮做爰伦理| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 97热精品久久久久久| 亚洲国产色片| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办 | 小说图片视频综合网站| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 亚洲av成人av| 嫩草影院新地址| 真人一进一出gif抽搐免费| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 级片在线观看| 色5月婷婷丁香| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 国产一区二区三区av在线 | 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 久久草成人影院| 日本三级黄在线观看| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 亚洲人成网站在线播放欧美日韩| 日本五十路高清| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 乱人视频在线观看| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 男女那种视频在线观看| 国产成人一区二区在线| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 国产精品福利在线免费观看| 国产精品一及| 日本免费a在线| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 性欧美人与动物交配| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 中文字幕久久专区| 日本五十路高清| 亚洲四区av| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 看免费成人av毛片| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看| 乱人视频在线观看| www.www免费av| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 日本三级黄在线观看| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 国产精品久久视频播放| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| av在线蜜桃| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 久久6这里有精品| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 窝窝影院91人妻| 欧美日韩黄片免| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 69av精品久久久久久| 麻豆av噜噜一区二区三区| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 国产在视频线在精品| 免费av不卡在线播放| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 久久久久性生活片| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 午夜福利高清视频| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 国产av一区在线观看免费| h日本视频在线播放| 成人国产麻豆网| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频 | 色哟哟·www| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 免费人成在线观看视频色| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 天堂动漫精品| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 尤物成人国产欧美一区二区三区| .国产精品久久| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 九九在线视频观看精品| 色吧在线观看| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 中文字幕久久专区| 午夜福利高清视频| 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| av在线亚洲专区| 日本色播在线视频| 99久久无色码亚洲精品果冻| 日本在线视频免费播放| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 97超视频在线观看视频| 1024手机看黄色片| 日日夜夜操网爽| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx在线观看| 国产视频内射| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 国模一区二区三区四区视频| 国产高清三级在线| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 国产中年淑女户外野战色| 欧美人与善性xxx| 国产高清激情床上av| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 成人欧美大片| 国产精品福利在线免费观看| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 日本黄大片高清| 日韩强制内射视频| 欧美成人免费av一区二区三区| 免费av不卡在线播放| 波多野结衣高清作品| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 亚洲最大成人中文| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| bbb黄色大片| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 最近在线观看免费完整版| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 香蕉av资源在线| 热99re8久久精品国产| 成人国产综合亚洲| 天堂√8在线中文| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 日韩欧美三级三区| 一级黄片播放器| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 在线观看66精品国产| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 一区二区三区激情视频| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 欧美国产日韩亚洲一区| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 精品久久久噜噜| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 精品福利观看| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 99热这里只有精品一区| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 在线国产一区二区在线| www.色视频.com| 国产亚洲欧美98| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 国内毛片毛片毛片毛片毛片| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 成人三级黄色视频| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 在线a可以看的网站| 欧美性感艳星| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 深夜精品福利| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 露出奶头的视频| 欧美激情国产日韩精品一区| 成人午夜高清在线视频| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 大型黄色视频在线免费观看| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 性色avwww在线观看| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 搞女人的毛片| 嫩草影院精品99| av专区在线播放| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 国内精品宾馆在线| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久 | 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 有码 亚洲区| 国产色婷婷99| 99热只有精品国产| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 在线观看一区二区三区| 欧美高清性xxxxhd video| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 搞女人的毛片| 极品教师在线免费播放|