Limits...
A Translational Animal Model for Scar Compression Therapy Using an Automated Pressure Delivery System.

Alkhalil A, Tejiram S, Travis TE, Prindeze NJ, Carney BC, Moffatt LT, Johnson LS, Ramella-Roman J, Shupp JW - Eplasty (2015)

Bottom Line: Gross scar examination by the Vancouver Scar Scale showed significant and sustained (>4 weeks) improvement in pressure-treated scars (P < .05).Histological examination of pressure-treated scars showed a significant decrease in dermal thickness compared with other groups (P < .05).Cellular quantification showed differential changes among treatment groups.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Firefighters' Burn and Surgical Research Laboratory, MedStar Health Research Institute, Washington, DC.

ABSTRACT

Background: Pressure therapy has been used to prevent and treat hypertrophic scars following cutaneous injury despite the limited understanding of its mechanism of action and lack of established animal model to optimize its usage.

Objectives: The aim of this work was to test and characterize a novel automated pressure delivery system designed to deliver steady and controllable pressure in a red Duroc swine hypertrophic scar model.

Methods: Excisional wounds were created by dermatome on 6 red Duroc pigs and allowed to scar while assessed weekly via gross visual inspection, laser Doppler imaging, and biopsy. A portable novel automated pressure delivery system was mounted on developing scars (n = 6) for 2 weeks.

Results: The device maintained a pressure range of 30 ± 4 mm Hg for more than 90% of the 2-week treatment period. Pressure readings outside this designated range were attributed to normal animal behavior and responses to healing progression. Gross scar examination by the Vancouver Scar Scale showed significant and sustained (>4 weeks) improvement in pressure-treated scars (P < .05). Histological examination of pressure-treated scars showed a significant decrease in dermal thickness compared with other groups (P < .05). Pressure-treated scars also showed increased perfusion by laser Doppler imaging during the treatment period compared with sham-treated and untreated scars (P < .05). Cellular quantification showed differential changes among treatment groups.

Conclusion: These results illustrate the applications of this technology in hypertrophic scar Duroc swine model and the evaluation and optimization of pressure therapy in wound-healing and hypertrophic scar management.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Comparison of changes in major skin layers after pressure application using H&E staining of sections. Representative image showing the main skin layer thickness (a). Thickness of the dermal (b) and epidermal (c) layers in biopsy specimens from pressure-treated, sham-treated, and untreated HTSs. HTS indicates hypertrophic scar. *Denotes statistical significance between treatment modalities.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4492193&req=5

Figure 6: Comparison of changes in major skin layers after pressure application using H&E staining of sections. Representative image showing the main skin layer thickness (a). Thickness of the dermal (b) and epidermal (c) layers in biopsy specimens from pressure-treated, sham-treated, and untreated HTSs. HTS indicates hypertrophic scar. *Denotes statistical significance between treatment modalities.

Mentions: Thickness of the epidermis and the dermis was quantified from H&E-stained sections (Fig 6a) of scars. Comparative analysis revealed a steady trend of reduced dermal thickness in pressure-treated scars (Fig 6b). Significant differences between sham and untreated scars were noted at days 70 and 84 postwounding (P < .05; Fig 6b). Assessment of changes in the epidermal layer showed nonspecific differences. These differences are probably due to heterogeneity of the epidermis across biopsy specimens (Fig 6c). Note that the effect of applying pressure for 2 weeks caused persistent changes in the dermis for at least 4 weeks after APDS removal (Fig 6b).


A Translational Animal Model for Scar Compression Therapy Using an Automated Pressure Delivery System.

Alkhalil A, Tejiram S, Travis TE, Prindeze NJ, Carney BC, Moffatt LT, Johnson LS, Ramella-Roman J, Shupp JW - Eplasty (2015)

Comparison of changes in major skin layers after pressure application using H&E staining of sections. Representative image showing the main skin layer thickness (a). Thickness of the dermal (b) and epidermal (c) layers in biopsy specimens from pressure-treated, sham-treated, and untreated HTSs. HTS indicates hypertrophic scar. *Denotes statistical significance between treatment modalities.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4492193&req=5

Figure 6: Comparison of changes in major skin layers after pressure application using H&E staining of sections. Representative image showing the main skin layer thickness (a). Thickness of the dermal (b) and epidermal (c) layers in biopsy specimens from pressure-treated, sham-treated, and untreated HTSs. HTS indicates hypertrophic scar. *Denotes statistical significance between treatment modalities.
Mentions: Thickness of the epidermis and the dermis was quantified from H&E-stained sections (Fig 6a) of scars. Comparative analysis revealed a steady trend of reduced dermal thickness in pressure-treated scars (Fig 6b). Significant differences between sham and untreated scars were noted at days 70 and 84 postwounding (P < .05; Fig 6b). Assessment of changes in the epidermal layer showed nonspecific differences. These differences are probably due to heterogeneity of the epidermis across biopsy specimens (Fig 6c). Note that the effect of applying pressure for 2 weeks caused persistent changes in the dermis for at least 4 weeks after APDS removal (Fig 6b).

Bottom Line: Gross scar examination by the Vancouver Scar Scale showed significant and sustained (>4 weeks) improvement in pressure-treated scars (P < .05).Histological examination of pressure-treated scars showed a significant decrease in dermal thickness compared with other groups (P < .05).Cellular quantification showed differential changes among treatment groups.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Firefighters' Burn and Surgical Research Laboratory, MedStar Health Research Institute, Washington, DC.

ABSTRACT

Background: Pressure therapy has been used to prevent and treat hypertrophic scars following cutaneous injury despite the limited understanding of its mechanism of action and lack of established animal model to optimize its usage.

Objectives: The aim of this work was to test and characterize a novel automated pressure delivery system designed to deliver steady and controllable pressure in a red Duroc swine hypertrophic scar model.

Methods: Excisional wounds were created by dermatome on 6 red Duroc pigs and allowed to scar while assessed weekly via gross visual inspection, laser Doppler imaging, and biopsy. A portable novel automated pressure delivery system was mounted on developing scars (n = 6) for 2 weeks.

Results: The device maintained a pressure range of 30 ± 4 mm Hg for more than 90% of the 2-week treatment period. Pressure readings outside this designated range were attributed to normal animal behavior and responses to healing progression. Gross scar examination by the Vancouver Scar Scale showed significant and sustained (>4 weeks) improvement in pressure-treated scars (P < .05). Histological examination of pressure-treated scars showed a significant decrease in dermal thickness compared with other groups (P < .05). Pressure-treated scars also showed increased perfusion by laser Doppler imaging during the treatment period compared with sham-treated and untreated scars (P < .05). Cellular quantification showed differential changes among treatment groups.

Conclusion: These results illustrate the applications of this technology in hypertrophic scar Duroc swine model and the evaluation and optimization of pressure therapy in wound-healing and hypertrophic scar management.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus