Cargando…

Dermal Matrices and Bioengineered Skin Substitutes: A Critical Review of Current Options

BACKGROUND: Over recent decades, scientists and surgeons have collaborated to develop various bioengineered and synthetic products as an alternative to skin grafts. Despite the numerous articles and reviews written about dermal skin substitutes, there is no general consensus. METHODS: This article r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Debels, Heidi, Hamdi, Moustapha, Abberton, Keren, Morrison, Wayne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4323388/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25674365
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000219
_version_ 1782356540642033664
author Debels, Heidi
Hamdi, Moustapha
Abberton, Keren
Morrison, Wayne
author_facet Debels, Heidi
Hamdi, Moustapha
Abberton, Keren
Morrison, Wayne
author_sort Debels, Heidi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Over recent decades, scientists and surgeons have collaborated to develop various bioengineered and synthetic products as an alternative to skin grafts. Despite the numerous articles and reviews written about dermal skin substitutes, there is no general consensus. METHODS: This article reviews dermal skin scaffolds used in clinical applications and experimental settings. For scaffold evaluation, we focused on clinical and/or histological results, and conclusions are listed. Explanations for general trends were sought based on existing knowledge about tissue engineering principles and wound healing mechanisms. RESULTS: Decellularized dermis seems to remain the best option with no other acellular scaffold being clinically proven to gain better results yet. In general, chemically cross-linked products were seen to be less effective in skin tissue engineering. Biocompatibility could be enhanced by preseeding substitutes with fibroblasts to allow some natural scaffold remodeling before product application. CONCLUSIONS: Skin substitutes are a useful tool in plastic and reconstructive surgery practices as an alternative to skin grafts. In the choice of substitute, the general plastic surgery principle of replacing like tissue with like tissue seems to be still standing, and products most resembling the natural dermal extracellular matrix should be preferred.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4323388
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43233882015-02-11 Dermal Matrices and Bioengineered Skin Substitutes: A Critical Review of Current Options Debels, Heidi Hamdi, Moustapha Abberton, Keren Morrison, Wayne Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Experimental BACKGROUND: Over recent decades, scientists and surgeons have collaborated to develop various bioengineered and synthetic products as an alternative to skin grafts. Despite the numerous articles and reviews written about dermal skin substitutes, there is no general consensus. METHODS: This article reviews dermal skin scaffolds used in clinical applications and experimental settings. For scaffold evaluation, we focused on clinical and/or histological results, and conclusions are listed. Explanations for general trends were sought based on existing knowledge about tissue engineering principles and wound healing mechanisms. RESULTS: Decellularized dermis seems to remain the best option with no other acellular scaffold being clinically proven to gain better results yet. In general, chemically cross-linked products were seen to be less effective in skin tissue engineering. Biocompatibility could be enhanced by preseeding substitutes with fibroblasts to allow some natural scaffold remodeling before product application. CONCLUSIONS: Skin substitutes are a useful tool in plastic and reconstructive surgery practices as an alternative to skin grafts. In the choice of substitute, the general plastic surgery principle of replacing like tissue with like tissue seems to be still standing, and products most resembling the natural dermal extracellular matrix should be preferred. Wolters Kluwer Health 2015-02-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4323388/ /pubmed/25674365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000219 Text en Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. All rights reserved. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License, where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle Experimental
Debels, Heidi
Hamdi, Moustapha
Abberton, Keren
Morrison, Wayne
Dermal Matrices and Bioengineered Skin Substitutes: A Critical Review of Current Options
title Dermal Matrices and Bioengineered Skin Substitutes: A Critical Review of Current Options
title_full Dermal Matrices and Bioengineered Skin Substitutes: A Critical Review of Current Options
title_fullStr Dermal Matrices and Bioengineered Skin Substitutes: A Critical Review of Current Options
title_full_unstemmed Dermal Matrices and Bioengineered Skin Substitutes: A Critical Review of Current Options
title_short Dermal Matrices and Bioengineered Skin Substitutes: A Critical Review of Current Options
title_sort dermal matrices and bioengineered skin substitutes: a critical review of current options
topic Experimental
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4323388/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25674365
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000219
work_keys_str_mv AT debelsheidi dermalmatricesandbioengineeredskinsubstitutesacriticalreviewofcurrentoptions
AT hamdimoustapha dermalmatricesandbioengineeredskinsubstitutesacriticalreviewofcurrentoptions
AT abbertonkeren dermalmatricesandbioengineeredskinsubstitutesacriticalreviewofcurrentoptions
AT morrisonwayne dermalmatricesandbioengineeredskinsubstitutesacriticalreviewofcurrentoptions