Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Burnsarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Burns
Article . 2014 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Moist dressing coverage supports proliferation and migration of transplanted skin micrografts in full-thickness porcine wounds

Authors: Florian, Hackl; Elizabeth, Kiwanuka; Justin, Philip; Philipp, Gerner; Pejman, Aflaki; J Rodrigo, Diaz-Siso; Geoffroy, Sisk; +3 Authors

Moist dressing coverage supports proliferation and migration of transplanted skin micrografts in full-thickness porcine wounds

Abstract

Transplantation of skin micrografts in a 1:100 ratio regenerate the epidermis of full-thickness wounds in pigs within 14 days in a wet environment. The aim of the current study was to combine micrografts and commercially available moist dressings. We hypothesized that micrografts regenerate the epidermis when covered with a moist dressing. 5cm×5cm and 10cm×10cm full-thickness wounds were created on the backs of pigs. Wounds were transplanted with 0.8mm×0.8mm micrografts created from a split-thickness skin graft in a 1:100 ratio. 5cm×5cm wounds were treated with wound chambers, moist dressings or dry gauze (non-transplanted control group). 10cm×10cm wounds were compared to non-transplanted wounds, both covered with moist dressings. Reepithelialization was assessed in biopsies from day 10, 14 and 18 post-transplantation. 5cm×5cm transplanted wounds covered with moist dressings showed 69.5±20.6% reepithelialization by day 14 and 90.5±10.4% by day 18, similar to wounds covered with a wound chamber (63.9±16.7 and 86.2±11.9%, respectively). 18 days post-transplantation, 10cm×10cm transplanted wounds covered with moist dressings showed 66.1±10.3% reepithelialization, whereas nontransplanted wounds covered with moist dressings were 40.6±6.6% reepithelialized. We conclude that micrografts combined with clinically available moist dressings regenerate the epidermis of full-thickness wounds.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Wound Healing, Swine, Wound Closure Techniques, Skin Transplantation, Treatment Outcome, Re-Epithelialization, Animals, Female, Epidermis, Bandages, Hydrocolloid, Skin

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    38
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
38
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!