4.4 Article

A Regenerative Approach with Dermal Micrografts in the Treatment of Chronic Ulcers

Journal

STEM CELL REVIEWS AND REPORTS
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages 139-148

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12015-016-9692-2

Keywords

Wound healing; Micrograft; Mesenchymal stem cells; Growth factors; Ulcers

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background The etiology of non-healing ulcers depends on both systemic and local factors. The introduction of advanced dressing, negative wound therapy and compression therapy have undoubtedly improved clinical outcomes. The principal aim of study was to demonstrate the efficacy of dermal micrografts in the treatment of ulcers with different etiologies. The second aim was to investigate in vitro the action of micrografts in the regenerative process. Methods The dermal micro-grafts were obtained from mechanical disaggregation of small pieces of skin tissue through a medical device called Rigeneracons. Results We observed in vivo the ability of dermal autologous micrografts to improve the healing of venous, diabetic, pressure and post-traumatic ulcers after few week of treatment accomplished in general with a better quality of life for the patients. In vitro results showed that these micrografts express mesenchymal stem cells (MSCS) marker such as CD34, CD73, CD90 and CD105, and are able to form a viable and proliferative biocomplex with collagen sponge. Finally, the site of ulcers displayed a different expression of epidermal growth factors, insulin-like growth factors, platelet-derived growth factors and their receptors and tumor necrosis factor-beta with respect to healthy skin samples. Conclusion We reported a good outcome for the treatment of chronic ulcers using dermal autologous micrografts. Finally, we suggest that the positivity to MSCs markers and the ability to interact with a scaffold can play a key role in their regenerative properties.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available