4.1 Article

Burn wound healing: present concepts, treatment strategies and future directions

期刊

JOURNAL OF WOUND CARE
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 5-19

出版社

MA HEALTHCARE LTD
DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2017.26.1.5

关键词

biofilm; burn wounds; skin grafts; tissue engineering; regenerative medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Burns are the most extensive forms of soft tissue injuries occasionally resulting in extensive and deep wounds and death. Burns can lead to severe mental and emotional distress, because of excessive scarring and skin contractures. Treatment of burns has always been a difficult medical problem and many different methods have been used to treat such injuries, locally. Biofilms are a collection of microorganisms that delay wound healing. One of the new methods of prevention and treatment of burn wound infections is application of antimicrobials, which act on biofilms and prevent the wound infection. Biofilm initiates a persistent, low-grade, inflammatory response, impairing both the epithelialisation and granulation tissue formation. Skin grafts have been shown to dramatically reduce deaths from infection. However, grafting has considerable limitations. Such injuries are long-lasting and many patients suffer from chronic pain for a long time. Tissue engineering is a new approach in reducing the limitations of conventional treatments and producing a supply of immunologically tolerant artificial tissue, leading to a permanent solution for damaged tissues; such criteria make it a costeffective and reliable treatment modality. To overcome the present limitations of burn wound healing, knowledge about the latest findings regarding healing mechanisms is important. Here the authors discuss the most important events regarding burn wound healing and review the latest treatment strategies that have been used for burn wounds from in vitro to clinical levels. Finally, we discuss the role of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine in the future of burn wound healing, modelling and remodelling.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据