Developing in vitro assays to quantitatively evaluate the interactions of dressings with wounds.
Analysis of Variance
Bandages
Bandages, Hydrocolloid
Cell Adhesion
/ physiology
Cell Survival
/ physiology
Cells, Cultured
Coculture Techniques
Culture Media
Evaluation Studies as Topic
Humans
In Vitro Techniques
Polyurethanes
/ pharmacology
Skin Absorption
/ drug effects
Wound Healing
/ drug effects
Wounds and Injuries
/ physiopathology
Journal
Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society
ISSN: 1524-475X
Titre abrégé: Wound Repair Regen
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9310939
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2019
11 2019
Historique:
received:
10
04
2019
accepted:
24
06
2019
pubmed:
6
7
2019
medline:
26
9
2020
entrez:
6
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Evaluating interactions between dressing and wound is important for understanding wound management. This study quantitatively compared four polyurethane foam-based wound dressings for their absorption profile, cell penetration, and adherence using two novel in vitro assays. The dressing with uniform pore sizes varying from 25~75 μm showed the highest absorption of both culture media and serum. The same dressing showed a 1.2- to 3.6-fold lower cell adherence (3 hours) than the other dressings, and ~20-fold lower cell penetration (5 days) than dressings with pore sizes varying from 55 to 343 μm. Additionally, cell and dressing interactions using a 3-dimensional wound healing assay showed that the dressings with the smallest pore size of 25~75 μm maintained the highest cell viability (76.3%) and promoted cell migration into the wound site. This data suggest that polyurethane foam dressing with smaller and evenly distributed pores promotes wound healing with less cellular adhesion and penetration.
Substances chimiques
Culture Media
0
Polyurethanes
0
polyurethane foam
9009-54-5
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
715-719Informations de copyright
© 2019 by the Wound Healing Society.
Références
Lee SM et al. Physical, morphological, and wound healing properties of a polyurethane foam-film dressing. Biomater Res 2016; 20: 15.
Meaume S, Téot L, Lazareth I, Martini J, Bohbot S. The importance of pain reduction through dressing selection in routine wound management: the MAPP study. J Wound Care 2004; 13: 409-13.
Dykes P, Heggie R. The link between the peel force of adhesive dressings and subjective discomfort in volunteer subjects. J Wound Care 2003; 12: 260-2.
Rueden CT et al. ImageJ2: ImageJ for the next generation of scientific image data. BMC Bioinformatics 2017; 18: 529.
Chen ZJ et al. A novel three-dimensional wound healing model. J Dev Biol 2014; 2: 198-209.
Jang SS, Minn KW. Wound dressing after CO2 laser resurfacing using a new dressing material: Medifoam (R). J Korean Soc AestheticPlast Surg 2002; 8: 149-54.
Doillon CJ, Silver FH. Collagen-based wound dressing: effects of hyaluronic acid and fibronectin on wound healing. Biomaterials 1986; 7: 3-8.
Terrill P, Sussman G, Bailey M. Absorption of blood by moist wound healing dressings. Primary Intention: The Australian Journal of Wound Management 2003; 11: 7.
Gethin G. The significance of surface pH in chronic wounds. Wounds UK 2007; 3: 52.