Artificial dermal substitutes for tissue regeneration: comparison of the clinical outcomes and histological findings of two templates.
Dermal substitutes
Integra
Pelnac
clinical study
histological study
skin substitutes
tissue regeneration
Journal
The Journal of international medical research
ISSN: 1473-2300
Titre abrégé: J Int Med Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0346411
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Aug 2020
Historique:
entrez:
14
8
2020
pubmed:
14
8
2020
medline:
15
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Artificial dermal substitutes (DSs) are fundamental in physiological wound healing to ensure consistent and enduring wound closure and provide a suitable scaffold to repair tissue. We compared the clinical and histological features of two DSs, Pelnac and Integra, in the treatment of traumatic and iatrogenic skin defects. This prospective observational study involved 71 randomly selected patients from our hospital. Wound healing was analyzed using the Wound Surface Area Assessment, the Vancouver Scar Scale, and a visual analog scale. Histological and immunohistochemical evaluations were also performed. At 2 weeks, greater regeneration with respect to proliferation of the epidermis and renewal of the dermis was observed with Pelnac than with Integra. At 4 weeks, the dermis had regenerated with both DSs. Both templates induced renewed collagen and revascularization. Differences in the Vancouver Scar Scale score were statistically significant at 4 weeks and 1 year. Pelnac produced a significant increase in contraction at 2 weeks with increasing effectiveness at 4 weeks. Integra produced a higher percentage reduction in the wound surface area and a shorter healing time than Pelnac for wounds >1.5 cm deep. Our observational data indicate that both DSs are effective and applicable in different clinical contexts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32790486
doi: 10.1177/0300060520945508
pmc: PMC7427157
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
300060520945508Références
Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:561410
pubmed: 23607091
Biomed Res Int. 2018 Mar 8;2018:5684679
pubmed: 29707571
Int J Surg Oncol. 2017;2017:9805980
pubmed: 28751990
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1997 Dec 31;831:280-93
pubmed: 9616720
Burns. 2012 Sep;38(6):820-9
pubmed: 22652473
Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2018 Aug;24(4):279-288
pubmed: 29336231
PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54256
pubmed: 23372696
J Vasc Surg. 2010 Sep;52(3 Suppl):59S-66S
pubmed: 20804934
Int Wound J. 2018 Oct;15(5):695-706
pubmed: 29590523
Indian J Plast Surg. 2018 Jan-Apr;51(1):46-53
pubmed: 29928079
Scars Burn Heal. 2017 Apr 06;3:2059513117700157
pubmed: 29799555
Biomaterials. 1990 Jul;11(5):356-60
pubmed: 2119236
Science. 2017 Jun 9;356(6342):1026-1030
pubmed: 28596335
J Int Med Res. 2009 Sep-Oct;37(5):1528-42
pubmed: 19930861
Regen Biomater. 2017 Oct;4(5):309-314
pubmed: 29026645
IMA J Math Appl Med Biol. 1992;9(3):177-96
pubmed: 1295928
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Jan;137(1):31e-43e
pubmed: 26710059
J Chin Med Assoc. 2018 Feb;81(2):94-101
pubmed: 29169897
Sci Rep. 2019 May 24;9(1):7797
pubmed: 31127144
Indian J Plast Surg. 2010 Sep;43(Suppl):S23-8
pubmed: 21321652
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 23;10(3):e0120322
pubmed: 25798623
Cell Mol Life Sci. 2016 Sep;73(18):3453-72
pubmed: 27154041
Indian J Surg. 2015 Dec;77(Suppl 3):1180-6
pubmed: 27011532
Regen Med. 2018 Jun;13(4):443-456
pubmed: 29985763
Hand Clin. 2014 May;30(2):239-52, vii
pubmed: 24731613
J Clin Med. 2019 Apr 17;8(4):
pubmed: 30999579
Arch Dermatol Res. 2011 Jul;303(5):301-15
pubmed: 21365208
Burns. 2017 Jun;43(4):846-851
pubmed: 27866883
Front Physiol. 2016 Aug 05;7:341
pubmed: 27547189
Acta Morphol Hung. 1984;32(1):47-55
pubmed: 6431760
Int Wound J. 2016 Sep;13 Suppl 3:52-6
pubmed: 27547964
Int J Burns Trauma. 2017 Jul 25;7(4):34-46
pubmed: 28804684