4.4 Article

Injected biodegradable polyurethane scaffolds support tissue infiltration and delay wound contraction in a porcine excisional model

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.33515

关键词

wound repair; polyurethane scaffold; porcine model; biodegradable; wound contraction

资金

  1. National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal, Kinetic Concepts, Inc.
  2. Department of Veterans Affairs
  3. Skin Diseases of the National Institutes of Health [AR056138]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The filling of wound cavities with new tissue is a challenge. We previously reported on the physical properties and wound healing kinetics of prefabricated, gas-blown polyurethane (PUR) scaffolds in rat and porcine excisional wounds. To address the capability of this material to fill complex wound cavities, this study examined the in vitro and in vivo reparative characteristics of injected PUR scaffolds employing a sucrose porogen. Using the porcine excisional wound model, we compared reparative outcomes to both preformed and injected scaffolds as well as untreated wounds at 9, 13, and 30 days after scaffold placement. Both injected and preformed scaffolds delayed wound contraction by 19% at 9 days and 12% at 13 days compared to nontreated wounds. This stenting effect proved transient since both formulations degraded by day 30. Both types of scaffolds significantly inhibited the undesirable alignment of collagen and fibroblasts through day 13. Injected scaffolds were highly compatible with sentinel cellular events of normal wound repair cell proliferation, apoptosis, and blood vessel density. The present study provides further evidence that either injected or preformed PUR scaffolds facilitate wound healing, support tissue infiltration and matrix production, delay wound contraction, and reduce scarring in a clinically relevant animal model, which underscores their potential utility as a void-filling platform for large cutaneous defects. (C) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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

4.4
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