• <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

    欧美国产日韩亚洲一区| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 国产成人欧美| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 日韩欧美免费精品| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 91字幕亚洲| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 国产1区2区3区精品| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| av欧美777| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 少妇 在线观看| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 亚洲av成人av| 亚洲av成人av| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3 | 亚洲五月天丁香| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 宅男免费午夜| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 少妇 在线观看| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验 | 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆 | 看片在线看免费视频| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 亚洲四区av| 久久久久九九精品影院| 日韩欧美免费精品| 亚洲av一区综合| 综合色av麻豆| 精品久久久久久久久av| 有码 亚洲区| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 久久久久久久久中文| 一级黄色大片毛片| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 在线看三级毛片| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 国产精品野战在线观看| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 性欧美人与动物交配| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 亚洲av成人av| 偷拍熟女少妇极品色| 一区二区三区免费毛片| 亚洲高清免费不卡视频| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 国产精品野战在线观看| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 九九在线视频观看精品| .国产精品久久| 亚洲无线观看免费| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 级片在线观看| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看 | 99热全是精品| 性色avwww在线观看| 俺也久久电影网| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 我要搜黄色片| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 亚洲av成人av| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 久久中文看片网| 丰满的人妻完整版| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av| 99热网站在线观看| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 身体一侧抽搐| 不卡一级毛片| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 欧美潮喷喷水| 中文字幕久久专区| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 在线播放国产精品三级| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 男女那种视频在线观看| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 亚洲第一电影网av| 亚洲不卡免费看| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 欧美高清性xxxxhd video| 成年免费大片在线观看| 欧美成人精品欧美一级黄| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 欧美日韩国产亚洲二区| 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 国产精品亚洲一级av第二区| 久久精品91蜜桃| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 亚洲成人久久性| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 99热只有精品国产| 久久久久久久久中文| 亚洲最大成人手机在线| 午夜爱爱视频在线播放| 国产亚洲欧美98| 直男gayav资源| 亚洲丝袜综合中文字幕| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 国产毛片a区久久久久| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 永久网站在线| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕 | 看片在线看免费视频| 国产免费男女视频| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在 | 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 十八禁网站免费在线| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 久久精品人妻少妇| 亚洲18禁久久av| 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 在线播放无遮挡| 日本黄大片高清| 精品一区二区免费观看| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 中国美女看黄片| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 在线播放无遮挡| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 久久草成人影院| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 1024手机看黄色片| 亚洲av不卡在线观看| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 精品日产1卡2卡| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 日本与韩国留学比较| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频 | 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 欧美高清性xxxxhd video| 欧美区成人在线视频| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 国产老妇女一区| 久久久久久大精品| 国产在视频线在精品| 在线天堂最新版资源| 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 毛片女人毛片| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 午夜影院日韩av| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| av在线亚洲专区| 亚洲av美国av| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 国产精品一区二区性色av| av视频在线观看入口| 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件 | 国产精品久久久久久久电影| 嫩草影院新地址| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 国产精品无大码| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 成人欧美大片| 丰满的人妻完整版| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| videossex国产| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 1024手机看黄色片| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线 | 美女黄网站色视频| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 大型黄色视频在线免费观看| 久久久色成人| 三级经典国产精品| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 看片在线看免费视频| 国产成人91sexporn| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| 草草在线视频免费看| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 久久久久国产网址| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 观看免费一级毛片| 午夜影院日韩av| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添小说| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 内射极品少妇av片p| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 日本一二三区视频观看| 三级经典国产精品| 久久久精品94久久精品| 国产精品伦人一区二区| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 精品久久久久久久末码| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 免费看av在线观看网站| 99久久无色码亚洲精品果冻| 久久久欧美国产精品| av免费在线看不卡| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| 97热精品久久久久久| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 色哟哟·www| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 春色校园在线视频观看| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 亚洲av.av天堂| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 校园春色视频在线观看| 深夜a级毛片| 午夜激情福利司机影院| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 国模一区二区三区四区视频| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| eeuss影院久久| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说 | 高清午夜精品一区二区三区 | 老司机影院成人| 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 观看美女的网站| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 99久国产av精品| av在线蜜桃| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频 | 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 波多野结衣高清作品| 成熟少妇高潮喷水视频| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 简卡轻食公司| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看| 观看美女的网站| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 91精品国产九色| 日日啪夜夜撸| 国内精品宾馆在线| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 色5月婷婷丁香| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看 | 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 精品午夜福利在线看| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 午夜激情欧美在线| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 久久久国产成人免费| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站 | 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 日本a在线网址| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放 | 成人特级av手机在线观看| 午夜视频国产福利| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 我要搜黄色片| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| videossex国产| 熟女电影av网| 1024手机看黄色片| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 免费看日本二区| 日韩中字成人| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 草草在线视频免费看| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆 | 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 久久久久久久久大av| 老司机福利观看| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久 | 一级av片app| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 乱系列少妇在线播放| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 色在线成人网| 亚洲久久久久久中文字幕| 久久久成人免费电影| 高清毛片免费看| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 久久久久久久久久黄片| av在线老鸭窝| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 禁无遮挡网站| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 99久久精品热视频| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 变态另类丝袜制服| 亚洲性久久影院| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 午夜免费激情av| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 色视频www国产| 看非洲黑人一级黄片| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 精品午夜福利在线看| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 亚洲无线在线观看| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 在线看三级毛片| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 观看免费一级毛片| 亚洲无线在线观看| 黄色配什么色好看| 久久久久国内视频| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 亚洲无线在线观看| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看 | 久久午夜福利片| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 六月丁香七月| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 99热精品在线国产| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 亚洲色图av天堂| 国模一区二区三区四区视频| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 国产一区二区三区av在线 | 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 久久久久九九精品影院| 1000部很黄的大片| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 老女人水多毛片| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| 久久九九热精品免费| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 国内精品宾馆在线| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 毛片女人毛片| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 久久热精品热| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 丝袜喷水一区| 美女黄网站色视频| 欧美成人免费av一区二区三区| av中文乱码字幕在线| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 1000部很黄的大片| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看 | 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 亚洲最大成人中文| av在线天堂中文字幕| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 尾随美女入室| 欧美性感艳星| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 观看美女的网站| 亚洲最大成人中文| 久久6这里有精品| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 黄色一级大片看看| 免费搜索国产男女视频| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 亚洲高清免费不卡视频| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 国模一区二区三区四区视频| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 在线免费十八禁| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 久久久久久大精品| 在线a可以看的网站| 99热6这里只有精品| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 欧美潮喷喷水| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 成年av动漫网址| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| eeuss影院久久| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 国产精品一区二区性色av| 极品教师在线视频| 精品久久久久久久久av| 国产黄片美女视频| 韩国av在线不卡| 国产精品一及| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 91av网一区二区| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 九色成人免费人妻av| 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 成人av在线播放网站| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久 | 久久久精品大字幕| 免费大片18禁| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 久久久精品94久久精品| 国产精品亚洲一级av第二区| 欧美3d第一页| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 三级经典国产精品| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 97超视频在线观看视频| 看免费成人av毛片| 久久精品夜色国产| 美女黄网站色视频| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区 | 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 校园春色视频在线观看| 亚洲最大成人av| 免费观看在线日韩| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 亚洲内射少妇av| 在线观看66精品国产| 免费看av在线观看网站| 床上黄色一级片| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 亚洲内射少妇av| 在线a可以看的网站| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 久久久久国产网址| 99热6这里只有精品| 亚洲av免费在线观看| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 十八禁网站免费在线| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 精品午夜福利在线看| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 在线看三级毛片| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 国产亚洲欧美98| 有码 亚洲区| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区 | 波野结衣二区三区在线| 性欧美人与动物交配| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜|