Cargando…

Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Some Biological Injected Wound Healing Stimulators and Criteria for Its Evaluation

PURPOSE: To investigate the comparative effectiveness of certain biological injectable stimulants for the healing of skin wounds and criteria for its assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative study of the effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cells (SC group), collagen (Collagen group), and depro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silina, Ekaterina Vladimirovna, Manturova, Natalia Evgenievna, Litvitskiy, Petr Frantsevich, Stupin, Victor Aleksandrovich
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7669517/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33209017
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S277047
_version_ 1783610589191340032
author Silina, Ekaterina Vladimirovna
Manturova, Natalia Evgenievna
Litvitskiy, Petr Frantsevich
Stupin, Victor Aleksandrovich
author_facet Silina, Ekaterina Vladimirovna
Manturova, Natalia Evgenievna
Litvitskiy, Petr Frantsevich
Stupin, Victor Aleksandrovich
author_sort Silina, Ekaterina Vladimirovna
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To investigate the comparative effectiveness of certain biological injectable stimulants for the healing of skin wounds and criteria for its assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative study of the effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cells (SC group), collagen (Collagen group), and deproteinized calf blood hemoderivative (DCBH group) was carried out using an acute wound model. Control wounds were injected with isotonic sodium chloride solution (Control group). A total of four groups (28 wounds per group) were included in the study. Aged male Wistar rats were used as experimental animals. A dynamic assessment of the wound areas and edges, microvasculature assessment via laser Doppler flowmetry, histological and morphometric analyses to determine the quantitative and qualitative fibroblasts composition, as well as the degree of newly synthesized collagen maturity, was conducted on days 0, 3, 7, and 14. RESULTS: The administration of SCs provided a rapid but short-lasting effect, whereas the administration of collagen resulted in a delayed but long-lasting wound-healing effect. DCBH resulted in little to no effect. An increase in the perfusion volume of the wound edges accelerated the regeneration process, while the level of microcirculation did not affect the number and activity of fibroblasts. The wound healing acceleration, as well as the new collagen and stratified epithelium formation and maturation, was associated with the presence of a sufficient pool of mature and active fibroblasts in the wound, and not with the number of fibroblasts. CONCLUSION: The present results clarify the action mechanisms of the studied drugs. In addition, the application purposes and different effects of each drug on the different wound healing phases were demonstrated. An assumption on the multi-component treatment advisability under the wound condition objective assessment possibility was made. Findings from this study may assist clinicians in making an informed transition to personalized wound management and achieve better clinical outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7669517
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76695172020-11-17 Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Some Biological Injected Wound Healing Stimulators and Criteria for Its Evaluation Silina, Ekaterina Vladimirovna Manturova, Natalia Evgenievna Litvitskiy, Petr Frantsevich Stupin, Victor Aleksandrovich Drug Des Devel Ther Original Research PURPOSE: To investigate the comparative effectiveness of certain biological injectable stimulants for the healing of skin wounds and criteria for its assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative study of the effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cells (SC group), collagen (Collagen group), and deproteinized calf blood hemoderivative (DCBH group) was carried out using an acute wound model. Control wounds were injected with isotonic sodium chloride solution (Control group). A total of four groups (28 wounds per group) were included in the study. Aged male Wistar rats were used as experimental animals. A dynamic assessment of the wound areas and edges, microvasculature assessment via laser Doppler flowmetry, histological and morphometric analyses to determine the quantitative and qualitative fibroblasts composition, as well as the degree of newly synthesized collagen maturity, was conducted on days 0, 3, 7, and 14. RESULTS: The administration of SCs provided a rapid but short-lasting effect, whereas the administration of collagen resulted in a delayed but long-lasting wound-healing effect. DCBH resulted in little to no effect. An increase in the perfusion volume of the wound edges accelerated the regeneration process, while the level of microcirculation did not affect the number and activity of fibroblasts. The wound healing acceleration, as well as the new collagen and stratified epithelium formation and maturation, was associated with the presence of a sufficient pool of mature and active fibroblasts in the wound, and not with the number of fibroblasts. CONCLUSION: The present results clarify the action mechanisms of the studied drugs. In addition, the application purposes and different effects of each drug on the different wound healing phases were demonstrated. An assumption on the multi-component treatment advisability under the wound condition objective assessment possibility was made. Findings from this study may assist clinicians in making an informed transition to personalized wound management and achieve better clinical outcomes. Dove 2020-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7669517/ /pubmed/33209017 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S277047 Text en © 2020 Silina et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Silina, Ekaterina Vladimirovna
Manturova, Natalia Evgenievna
Litvitskiy, Petr Frantsevich
Stupin, Victor Aleksandrovich
Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Some Biological Injected Wound Healing Stimulators and Criteria for Its Evaluation
title Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Some Biological Injected Wound Healing Stimulators and Criteria for Its Evaluation
title_full Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Some Biological Injected Wound Healing Stimulators and Criteria for Its Evaluation
title_fullStr Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Some Biological Injected Wound Healing Stimulators and Criteria for Its Evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Some Biological Injected Wound Healing Stimulators and Criteria for Its Evaluation
title_short Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Some Biological Injected Wound Healing Stimulators and Criteria for Its Evaluation
title_sort comparative analysis of the effectiveness of some biological injected wound healing stimulators and criteria for its evaluation
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7669517/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33209017
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S277047
work_keys_str_mv AT silinaekaterinavladimirovna comparativeanalysisoftheeffectivenessofsomebiologicalinjectedwoundhealingstimulatorsandcriteriaforitsevaluation
AT manturovanataliaevgenievna comparativeanalysisoftheeffectivenessofsomebiologicalinjectedwoundhealingstimulatorsandcriteriaforitsevaluation
AT litvitskiypetrfrantsevich comparativeanalysisoftheeffectivenessofsomebiologicalinjectedwoundhealingstimulatorsandcriteriaforitsevaluation
AT stupinvictoraleksandrovich comparativeanalysisoftheeffectivenessofsomebiologicalinjectedwoundhealingstimulatorsandcriteriaforitsevaluation