Cargando…

Fibroblast Growth Factor-1 vs. Fibroblast Growth Factor-2 in Ischemic Skin Flap Survival in a Rat Animal Model

BACKGROUND: One of the main challenges in skin flap surgery is tissue ischemia and following necrosis. The present study compares the effects of fibroblast growth factors 1 and 2 on increasing cutaneous vasculature, improving ischemia, and preventing distal necrosis in ischemic skin flaps in rat mod...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fayazzadeh, Ehsan, Yavarifar, Hana, Rafie, Seyyed Reza, Motamed, Sadrollah, Sotoudeh Anvari, Maryam, Boroumand, Mohammad Ali
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Iranian Society for Plastic Surgeons 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5109389/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27853691
_version_ 1782467529018441728
author Fayazzadeh, Ehsan
Yavarifar, Hana
Rafie, Seyyed Reza
Motamed, Sadrollah
Sotoudeh Anvari, Maryam
Boroumand, Mohammad Ali
author_facet Fayazzadeh, Ehsan
Yavarifar, Hana
Rafie, Seyyed Reza
Motamed, Sadrollah
Sotoudeh Anvari, Maryam
Boroumand, Mohammad Ali
author_sort Fayazzadeh, Ehsan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: One of the main challenges in skin flap surgery is tissue ischemia and following necrosis. The present study compares the effects of fibroblast growth factors 1 and 2 on increasing cutaneous vasculature, improving ischemia, and preventing distal necrosis in ischemic skin flaps in rat model. METHODS: Thirty rats were allocated into 3 groups (n=10) and 2×8 cm dorsal random-pattern skin flaps were raised after four daily subdermal injections of normal saline (control group), fibroblast growth factor 1 (FGF-1 group; 2.5 µg/day), or fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF-2 group; 2.5 µg/day) at designated flap areas. Skin flap viability and number of blood vessels were evaluated on day 10 after elevation by planimetric analysis and histological examination. RESULTS: It was shown that administrations of FGF-1 and FGF-2 significantly decreased the percentage of flap necrosis and improved the percentage of ischemic survivable area, compared to the control samples. Meanwhile, the differences between these factors in terms of preventing skin flap necrosis and improving ischemia were also significant. The number of visible blood vessel sections was also higher in FGF-1 and FGF-2 groups than in the control group. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that, while FGF-2 is still much more potent than FGF-1, treatment with either of these drugs could be very effective in increasing the survival of surgical flaps at risk (length to width ratio>3) in situations that other therapeutic options could not be considered.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5109389
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Iranian Society for Plastic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51093892016-11-16 Fibroblast Growth Factor-1 vs. Fibroblast Growth Factor-2 in Ischemic Skin Flap Survival in a Rat Animal Model Fayazzadeh, Ehsan Yavarifar, Hana Rafie, Seyyed Reza Motamed, Sadrollah Sotoudeh Anvari, Maryam Boroumand, Mohammad Ali World J Plast Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: One of the main challenges in skin flap surgery is tissue ischemia and following necrosis. The present study compares the effects of fibroblast growth factors 1 and 2 on increasing cutaneous vasculature, improving ischemia, and preventing distal necrosis in ischemic skin flaps in rat model. METHODS: Thirty rats were allocated into 3 groups (n=10) and 2×8 cm dorsal random-pattern skin flaps were raised after four daily subdermal injections of normal saline (control group), fibroblast growth factor 1 (FGF-1 group; 2.5 µg/day), or fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF-2 group; 2.5 µg/day) at designated flap areas. Skin flap viability and number of blood vessels were evaluated on day 10 after elevation by planimetric analysis and histological examination. RESULTS: It was shown that administrations of FGF-1 and FGF-2 significantly decreased the percentage of flap necrosis and improved the percentage of ischemic survivable area, compared to the control samples. Meanwhile, the differences between these factors in terms of preventing skin flap necrosis and improving ischemia were also significant. The number of visible blood vessel sections was also higher in FGF-1 and FGF-2 groups than in the control group. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that, while FGF-2 is still much more potent than FGF-1, treatment with either of these drugs could be very effective in increasing the survival of surgical flaps at risk (length to width ratio>3) in situations that other therapeutic options could not be considered. Iranian Society for Plastic Surgeons 2016-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5109389/ /pubmed/27853691 Text en This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Fayazzadeh, Ehsan
Yavarifar, Hana
Rafie, Seyyed Reza
Motamed, Sadrollah
Sotoudeh Anvari, Maryam
Boroumand, Mohammad Ali
Fibroblast Growth Factor-1 vs. Fibroblast Growth Factor-2 in Ischemic Skin Flap Survival in a Rat Animal Model
title Fibroblast Growth Factor-1 vs. Fibroblast Growth Factor-2 in Ischemic Skin Flap Survival in a Rat Animal Model
title_full Fibroblast Growth Factor-1 vs. Fibroblast Growth Factor-2 in Ischemic Skin Flap Survival in a Rat Animal Model
title_fullStr Fibroblast Growth Factor-1 vs. Fibroblast Growth Factor-2 in Ischemic Skin Flap Survival in a Rat Animal Model
title_full_unstemmed Fibroblast Growth Factor-1 vs. Fibroblast Growth Factor-2 in Ischemic Skin Flap Survival in a Rat Animal Model
title_short Fibroblast Growth Factor-1 vs. Fibroblast Growth Factor-2 in Ischemic Skin Flap Survival in a Rat Animal Model
title_sort fibroblast growth factor-1 vs. fibroblast growth factor-2 in ischemic skin flap survival in a rat animal model
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5109389/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27853691
work_keys_str_mv AT fayazzadehehsan fibroblastgrowthfactor1vsfibroblastgrowthfactor2inischemicskinflapsurvivalinaratanimalmodel
AT yavarifarhana fibroblastgrowthfactor1vsfibroblastgrowthfactor2inischemicskinflapsurvivalinaratanimalmodel
AT rafieseyyedreza fibroblastgrowthfactor1vsfibroblastgrowthfactor2inischemicskinflapsurvivalinaratanimalmodel
AT motamedsadrollah fibroblastgrowthfactor1vsfibroblastgrowthfactor2inischemicskinflapsurvivalinaratanimalmodel
AT sotoudehanvarimaryam fibroblastgrowthfactor1vsfibroblastgrowthfactor2inischemicskinflapsurvivalinaratanimalmodel
AT boroumandmohammadali fibroblastgrowthfactor1vsfibroblastgrowthfactor2inischemicskinflapsurvivalinaratanimalmodel