Cargando…

Long‐term follow‐up comparison of two different bi‐layer dermal substitutes in tissue regeneration: Clinical outcomes and histological findings

Double layer dermal substitute (DS) consist of a 3‐dimensional collagen structures and a superficial silicon layer that are positioned within the defect provide to promote tissue regeneration in skin wounds. DS often have unique physical characteristics due to differences in manufacturing techniques...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Angelis, Barbara, Orlandi, Fabrizio, Fernandes Lopes Morais D’Autilio, Margarida, Scioli, Maria G, Orlandi, Augusto, Cervelli, Valerio, Gentile, Pietro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7949690/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29590523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12912
_version_ 1783663523600007168
author De Angelis, Barbara
Orlandi, Fabrizio
Fernandes Lopes Morais D’Autilio, Margarida
Scioli, Maria G
Orlandi, Augusto
Cervelli, Valerio
Gentile, Pietro
author_facet De Angelis, Barbara
Orlandi, Fabrizio
Fernandes Lopes Morais D’Autilio, Margarida
Scioli, Maria G
Orlandi, Augusto
Cervelli, Valerio
Gentile, Pietro
author_sort De Angelis, Barbara
collection PubMed
description Double layer dermal substitute (DS) consist of a 3‐dimensional collagen structures and a superficial silicon layer that are positioned within the defect provide to promote tissue regeneration in skin wounds. DS often have unique physical characteristics due to differences in manufacturing techniques. The aim of this study is the clinical and histological comparison of Nevelia and Integra double layer DSs in patients with post‐traumatic injury wounds. Thirty patients with post‐traumatic wounds localised on the inferior limbs were randomised in 2 groups Nevelia or Integra, followed by autologous dermal epidermal graft (DEG). Clinical results were evaluated through the healing time; Manchester Scar Scale (MSS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 1, 2, and 3 weeks and after 1 and 3 years. Histological and immunohistochemical evaluation were performed at 0, 2, and 3 weeks. The difference in healing time between groups (P = .467, log‐rank test), pain and self‐estimation was not statistically significant after 35, 42, and 49 days and at 1‐year follow up. Histological data showed evident healing of wound after 2 weeks compared with preoperative with both DSs. At 3 weeks reepithelialisation and dermal regeneration were evident with both substitutes; however Nevelia showed early regenerative properties in terms of epidermal proliferation and dermal renewal compared with Integra. Nevelia showed also a more evident angiogenesis vs Integra evaluated as α‐SMA immunohistochemistry. Differences in the MSS score were statistically significant at 3 years follow up in favour of Nevelia group (P = .001). At long‐term follow up, Nevelia showed a better clinical outcome measured as MSS score vs Integra measured as MSS. Histological and immunohistochemistry data showed that Nevelia allows faster neoangiogenesis and tissue regeneration with neoformed tissue architecture closer to the physiology of the skin.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7949690
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79496902021-07-02 Long‐term follow‐up comparison of two different bi‐layer dermal substitutes in tissue regeneration: Clinical outcomes and histological findings De Angelis, Barbara Orlandi, Fabrizio Fernandes Lopes Morais D’Autilio, Margarida Scioli, Maria G Orlandi, Augusto Cervelli, Valerio Gentile, Pietro Int Wound J Original Articles Double layer dermal substitute (DS) consist of a 3‐dimensional collagen structures and a superficial silicon layer that are positioned within the defect provide to promote tissue regeneration in skin wounds. DS often have unique physical characteristics due to differences in manufacturing techniques. The aim of this study is the clinical and histological comparison of Nevelia and Integra double layer DSs in patients with post‐traumatic injury wounds. Thirty patients with post‐traumatic wounds localised on the inferior limbs were randomised in 2 groups Nevelia or Integra, followed by autologous dermal epidermal graft (DEG). Clinical results were evaluated through the healing time; Manchester Scar Scale (MSS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 1, 2, and 3 weeks and after 1 and 3 years. Histological and immunohistochemical evaluation were performed at 0, 2, and 3 weeks. The difference in healing time between groups (P = .467, log‐rank test), pain and self‐estimation was not statistically significant after 35, 42, and 49 days and at 1‐year follow up. Histological data showed evident healing of wound after 2 weeks compared with preoperative with both DSs. At 3 weeks reepithelialisation and dermal regeneration were evident with both substitutes; however Nevelia showed early regenerative properties in terms of epidermal proliferation and dermal renewal compared with Integra. Nevelia showed also a more evident angiogenesis vs Integra evaluated as α‐SMA immunohistochemistry. Differences in the MSS score were statistically significant at 3 years follow up in favour of Nevelia group (P = .001). At long‐term follow up, Nevelia showed a better clinical outcome measured as MSS score vs Integra measured as MSS. Histological and immunohistochemistry data showed that Nevelia allows faster neoangiogenesis and tissue regeneration with neoformed tissue architecture closer to the physiology of the skin. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2018-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7949690/ /pubmed/29590523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12912 Text en © 2018 The Authors. International Wound Journal published by Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
De Angelis, Barbara
Orlandi, Fabrizio
Fernandes Lopes Morais D’Autilio, Margarida
Scioli, Maria G
Orlandi, Augusto
Cervelli, Valerio
Gentile, Pietro
Long‐term follow‐up comparison of two different bi‐layer dermal substitutes in tissue regeneration: Clinical outcomes and histological findings
title Long‐term follow‐up comparison of two different bi‐layer dermal substitutes in tissue regeneration: Clinical outcomes and histological findings
title_full Long‐term follow‐up comparison of two different bi‐layer dermal substitutes in tissue regeneration: Clinical outcomes and histological findings
title_fullStr Long‐term follow‐up comparison of two different bi‐layer dermal substitutes in tissue regeneration: Clinical outcomes and histological findings
title_full_unstemmed Long‐term follow‐up comparison of two different bi‐layer dermal substitutes in tissue regeneration: Clinical outcomes and histological findings
title_short Long‐term follow‐up comparison of two different bi‐layer dermal substitutes in tissue regeneration: Clinical outcomes and histological findings
title_sort long‐term follow‐up comparison of two different bi‐layer dermal substitutes in tissue regeneration: clinical outcomes and histological findings
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7949690/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29590523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12912
work_keys_str_mv AT deangelisbarbara longtermfollowupcomparisonoftwodifferentbilayerdermalsubstitutesintissueregenerationclinicaloutcomesandhistologicalfindings
AT orlandifabrizio longtermfollowupcomparisonoftwodifferentbilayerdermalsubstitutesintissueregenerationclinicaloutcomesandhistologicalfindings
AT fernandeslopesmoraisdautiliomargarida longtermfollowupcomparisonoftwodifferentbilayerdermalsubstitutesintissueregenerationclinicaloutcomesandhistologicalfindings
AT sciolimariag longtermfollowupcomparisonoftwodifferentbilayerdermalsubstitutesintissueregenerationclinicaloutcomesandhistologicalfindings
AT orlandiaugusto longtermfollowupcomparisonoftwodifferentbilayerdermalsubstitutesintissueregenerationclinicaloutcomesandhistologicalfindings
AT cervellivalerio longtermfollowupcomparisonoftwodifferentbilayerdermalsubstitutesintissueregenerationclinicaloutcomesandhistologicalfindings
AT gentilepietro longtermfollowupcomparisonoftwodifferentbilayerdermalsubstitutesintissueregenerationclinicaloutcomesandhistologicalfindings