The data here reported introduce the wound-healing assay as a tool for testing probiotics aimed at protecting gastrointestinal mucosal surfaces and to verify the consistency of their manufacturing. At the scope, we compared the in vitro effects of two multi-strain high concentration formulations both commercialized under the same brand VSL#3 but sourced from different production sites (USA and Italy) on a non-transformed small-intestinal epithelial cell line, IEC-6. The effects on cellular morphology, viability, migration, and H O -induced damage, were assessed before and after the treatment with both VSL#3 formulations. While the USA-sourced product ("USA-made") VSL#3 did not affect monolayer morphology and cellular density, the addition of bacteria from the Italy-derived product ("Italy-made") VSL#3 caused clear morphological cell damage and strongly reduced cellularity. The treatment with "USA-made" lysate led to a higher rate of wounded monolayer healing, while the addition of "Italy-made" bacterial lysate did not influence the closure rate as compared to untreated cells. While lysates from "USA-made" VSL#3 clearly enhanced the formation of elongated and aligned stress fibers, "Italy-made" lysates had not similar effect. "USA-made" lysate was able to cause a total inhibition of H O -induced cytotoxic effect whereas "Italy-made" VSL#3 lysate was unable to protect IEC-6 cells from H O -induced damage. ROS generation was also differently influenced, thus supporting the hypotesis of a protective action of "USA-made" VSL#3 lysates, as well as the idea that "Italy-made" formulation was unable to prevent significantly the H O -induced oxidative stress.