Cargando…
The healing dynamics of non‐healing wounds using cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane
We evaluated the effect of the application of cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane on the healing of 26 non‐healing wounds (18 patients) with varying aetiologies and baseline sizes (average of 15.4 cm(2)), which had resisted the standard of care treatment for 6 to 456 weeks (average 88.8 weeks). Based o...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9284646/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34791774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13719 |
_version_ | 1784747609483640832 |
---|---|
author | Svobodova, Alzbeta Horvath, Vojtech Smeringaiova, Ingrida Cabral, Joao Victor Zemlickova, Martina Fiala, Radovan Burkert, Jan Nemetova, Denisa Stadler, Petr Lindner, Jaroslav Bednar, Jan Jirsova, Katerina |
author_facet | Svobodova, Alzbeta Horvath, Vojtech Smeringaiova, Ingrida Cabral, Joao Victor Zemlickova, Martina Fiala, Radovan Burkert, Jan Nemetova, Denisa Stadler, Petr Lindner, Jaroslav Bednar, Jan Jirsova, Katerina |
author_sort | Svobodova, Alzbeta |
collection | PubMed |
description | We evaluated the effect of the application of cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane on the healing of 26 non‐healing wounds (18 patients) with varying aetiologies and baseline sizes (average of 15.4 cm(2)), which had resisted the standard of care treatment for 6 to 456 weeks (average 88.8 weeks). Based on their average general responses to the application of cryo‐preserved AM, we could differentiate three wound groups. The first healed group was characterised by complete healing (100% wound closure, maximum treatment period 38 weeks) and represented 62% of treated wounds. The wound area reduction of at least 50% was reached for all wounds in this group within the first 10 weeks of treatment. Exactly 19% of the studied wounds responded partially to the treatment (partially healed group), reaching less than 25% of closure in the first 10 weeks and 90% at maximum for extended treatment period (up to 78 weeks). The remaining 19% of treated wounds did not show any reaction to the AM application (unhealed defects). The three groups have different profiles of wound area reduction, which can be used as a guideline in predicting the healing prognosis of non‐healing wounds treated with a cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9284646 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92846462022-07-19 The healing dynamics of non‐healing wounds using cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane Svobodova, Alzbeta Horvath, Vojtech Smeringaiova, Ingrida Cabral, Joao Victor Zemlickova, Martina Fiala, Radovan Burkert, Jan Nemetova, Denisa Stadler, Petr Lindner, Jaroslav Bednar, Jan Jirsova, Katerina Int Wound J Original Articles We evaluated the effect of the application of cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane on the healing of 26 non‐healing wounds (18 patients) with varying aetiologies and baseline sizes (average of 15.4 cm(2)), which had resisted the standard of care treatment for 6 to 456 weeks (average 88.8 weeks). Based on their average general responses to the application of cryo‐preserved AM, we could differentiate three wound groups. The first healed group was characterised by complete healing (100% wound closure, maximum treatment period 38 weeks) and represented 62% of treated wounds. The wound area reduction of at least 50% was reached for all wounds in this group within the first 10 weeks of treatment. Exactly 19% of the studied wounds responded partially to the treatment (partially healed group), reaching less than 25% of closure in the first 10 weeks and 90% at maximum for extended treatment period (up to 78 weeks). The remaining 19% of treated wounds did not show any reaction to the AM application (unhealed defects). The three groups have different profiles of wound area reduction, which can be used as a guideline in predicting the healing prognosis of non‐healing wounds treated with a cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2021-11-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9284646/ /pubmed/34791774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13719 Text en © 2021 The Authors. International Wound Journal published by Medicalhelplines.com Inc (3M) and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://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 Svobodova, Alzbeta Horvath, Vojtech Smeringaiova, Ingrida Cabral, Joao Victor Zemlickova, Martina Fiala, Radovan Burkert, Jan Nemetova, Denisa Stadler, Petr Lindner, Jaroslav Bednar, Jan Jirsova, Katerina The healing dynamics of non‐healing wounds using cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane |
title | The healing dynamics of non‐healing wounds using cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane |
title_full | The healing dynamics of non‐healing wounds using cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane |
title_fullStr | The healing dynamics of non‐healing wounds using cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane |
title_full_unstemmed | The healing dynamics of non‐healing wounds using cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane |
title_short | The healing dynamics of non‐healing wounds using cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane |
title_sort | healing dynamics of non‐healing wounds using cryo‐preserved amniotic membrane |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9284646/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34791774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13719 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT svobodovaalzbeta thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT horvathvojtech thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT smeringaiovaingrida thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT cabraljoaovictor thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT zemlickovamartina thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT fialaradovan thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT burkertjan thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT nemetovadenisa thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT stadlerpetr thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT lindnerjaroslav thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT bednarjan thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT jirsovakaterina thehealingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT svobodovaalzbeta healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT horvathvojtech healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT smeringaiovaingrida healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT cabraljoaovictor healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT zemlickovamartina healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT fialaradovan healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT burkertjan healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT nemetovadenisa healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT stadlerpetr healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT lindnerjaroslav healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT bednarjan healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane AT jirsovakaterina healingdynamicsofnonhealingwoundsusingcryopreservedamnioticmembrane |