An ultrastructural pathologist's views on fibroblasts, modified smooth muscle cells, wound healing, stenosing arteriopathies, Kawasaki disease, Dupuytren's contracture, and the stroma of carcinomas

Jan Marc Orenstein
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01913123.2019.1704332
2020-01-02
Abstract:It wasn't until 1960 that the dense bodies of the peripheral actin arrays of fibroblasts were finally visualized, i.e., stress fibers (SFs). Mistakenly assumed that its SFs turned the fibroblast into a unique cell situated somewhere in a continuum between it and a smooth muscle cell (SMC), it was descriptively named a "myofibroblast" (MF). Automatically, spindle cells with SFs and/or smooth muscle actin by SMA IHC-staining, became MFs, although endothelial cells, pericytes, modified SMCs (mSMC), and myoepithelial cells all contain SFs. An invisible "intermediate" cell was hypothesized to exist somewhere between SMA-negative and positive fibroblasts, and named a "proto-myofibroblast". The sub-epithelial spindle cells of normal and malignant tumors of the GI, GU, and respiratory tracts are all fibroblasts with SFs. The second erroneous myofibroblast came from a 1971 rat wound healing study and its 1974 human counterpart. Updated analysis of the papers' TEMs proved that the cells are mSMCs and not fibroblasts (AKA: MFs). The pathognomonic cells of Dupuytren's contracture are mSMCs and fibroblasts and that of the stenosing arteriopathy of Kawasaki Disease and other similar arteriopathies are mSMCs. TEM remains a powerful tool.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?