Comparative Experimental Study of Dermal Stability: Acellular Dermal Matrix versus Crayopreserved Dermis.
Acellular dermal matrix
Collagen
Crayopreserved dermis
Fibroblasts
Inflammation
Pathological neovascularization
Journal
World journal of plastic surgery
ISSN: 2228-7914
Titre abrégé: World J Plast Surg
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101639130
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2021
May 2021
Historique:
received:
26
10
2018
accepted:
10
05
2020
entrez:
26
7
2021
pubmed:
27
7
2021
medline:
27
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Given the potential usefulness of Acellular Dermal Matrices (ADM) for wound healing, we aimed to evaluate the stability, histological characteristics, and effectiveness of ADM compared with cryopreserved dermis (CPD) in rat models. This experimental study was conducted in the Department of Surgery, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran, from January to March 2015. The prepared ADM and CPD were transplanted to the full-thickness skin defects on the back of Sprague-Dawley rats. Forty-five days after grafting, the tissues were harvested for histological examination. These two types of the dermis' quality and stability were compared with consideration of the following factors; inflammation, fibroblasts migration, vascularization, collagen formation, capsule formation, and microabscess formation. From 19 selected rates, nine received CPD, and ten were treated with ADM. After transplantation, the mean (SD) weight of ADM and CPD grafts were 1.74 (0.07) and 1.45 (0.77), respectively ( ADM have a superior effect than CPD in the wound healing process. Both samples had a similar effect in capsule and microabscesses formation and higher costs of ADM preparation. According to the physicians' decision and evaluation of the process's cost-effectiveness, CPD could be appropriately used as an alternative to ADM.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Given the potential usefulness of Acellular Dermal Matrices (ADM) for wound healing, we aimed to evaluate the stability, histological characteristics, and effectiveness of ADM compared with cryopreserved dermis (CPD) in rat models.
METHODS
METHODS
This experimental study was conducted in the Department of Surgery, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran, from January to March 2015. The prepared ADM and CPD were transplanted to the full-thickness skin defects on the back of Sprague-Dawley rats. Forty-five days after grafting, the tissues were harvested for histological examination. These two types of the dermis' quality and stability were compared with consideration of the following factors; inflammation, fibroblasts migration, vascularization, collagen formation, capsule formation, and microabscess formation.
RESULTS
RESULTS
From 19 selected rates, nine received CPD, and ten were treated with ADM. After transplantation, the mean (SD) weight of ADM and CPD grafts were 1.74 (0.07) and 1.45 (0.77), respectively (
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
ADM have a superior effect than CPD in the wound healing process. Both samples had a similar effect in capsule and microabscesses formation and higher costs of ADM preparation. According to the physicians' decision and evaluation of the process's cost-effectiveness, CPD could be appropriately used as an alternative to ADM.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34307102
doi: 10.29252/wjps.10.2.82
pmc: PMC8290440
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
82-88Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests.
Références
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010 Mar;63(3):404-9
pubmed: 19254877
J Reconstr Microsurg. 2014 Jan;30(1):31-4
pubmed: 23864532
J Burn Care Rehabil. 1997 Jan-Feb;18(1 Pt 1):52-7
pubmed: 9063788
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009 Jul;124(1):82-91
pubmed: 19568048
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 Apr;121(4):1256-1262
pubmed: 18349644
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010 Dec;63(12):2081-90
pubmed: 20335086
Acta Biomed. 2005;76 Suppl 1:69-71
pubmed: 16450516
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Mar;39(3):242-7
pubmed: 23266307
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015 Feb 06;3(1):e284
pubmed: 25674365
Biomed Eng Online. 2013 Dec 04;12:125
pubmed: 24304500
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014 Apr;67(4):468-76
pubmed: 24508194
Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2005 Feb;17(2):92-4
pubmed: 15698493
Dermatol Res Pract. 2010;2010:210150
pubmed: 21234359
Hernia. 2011 Apr;15(2):157-64
pubmed: 21222009
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 May;125(5):1450-1459
pubmed: 20440164
Dermatol Surg. 2010 Mar;36(3):426
pubmed: 20402947
Nature. 2008 May 15;453(7193):314-21
pubmed: 18480812
J Burn Care Res. 2007 May-Jun;28(3):530-2
pubmed: 17438499
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Dec;126(6):1842-1847
pubmed: 21124125
Tissue Eng Part A. 2011 Mar;17(5-6):665-75
pubmed: 20929281
Surg Endosc. 2012 Aug;26(8):2322-30
pubmed: 22358124
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1999 Sep-Oct;23(5):316-22
pubmed: 10541844
J Invest Dermatol. 2007 Mar;127(3):514-25
pubmed: 17299434
J R Soc Interface. 2010 Feb 6;7(43):229-58
pubmed: 19864266
J Burns Wounds. 2005 Mar 14;4:e4
pubmed: 16921409
J Invest Dermatol. 2007 May;127(5):1018-29
pubmed: 17435787