Immunohistochemical Analysis of Postburn Scars following Treatment Using Dermal Substitutes

M. Y. Lee, Hyunchul Kim, I. Kwak, Young-Gyu Jang, Y. Choi
{"title":"Immunohistochemical Analysis of Postburn Scars following Treatment Using Dermal Substitutes","authors":"M. Y. Lee, Hyunchul Kim, I. Kwak, Young-Gyu Jang, Y. Choi","doi":"10.1155/2022/3686863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Post-burn hypertrophic scars commonly occur after burns. Studies that compare dermal substitutes with other treatment methods are insufficient. The purpose was to analyze the histopathological differences in hypertrophic burn scars after Matriderm®+split-thickness skin graft (STSG) and compare with AlloDerm®+STSG, STSG, full-thickness skin graft (FTSG), and normal skin. Methods Samples of unburned, normal skin and deep 2nd or 3rd degree burns were obtained from patients who experienced a burn injury in the past to at least 6 months before biopsy, which was performed between 2011 and 2012. All subjects received >6 months of treatment before the biopsy. Intervention groups were normal (63), STSG (28), FTSG (6), Matriderm® (11), and AlloDerm® (18). Immunohistochemical analyses of elastin, collagen I, collagen III, cluster of differentiation 31 (CD31), smooth muscle actin (α-SMA), and laminin from scar and control tissues were performed and compared. Results α-SMA vascular quantity and vessel width, stromal CD31, and basement membrane laminin expression were not significantly different between normal and intervention groups. Matriderm® group showed no significant difference in elastin, collagen III, stromal CD31 and α-SMA, CD31 vessel width, stromal α-SMA, vessel quantity and width, and laminin length compared to the normal group, meaning they were not significantly different from the normal skin traits. Conclusion Dermal substitutes may be an optimal alternative to address the cosmetic and functional limitations posed by other treatment methods.","PeriodicalId":313227,"journal":{"name":"Analytical Cellular Pathology (Amsterdam)","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytical Cellular Pathology (Amsterdam)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3686863","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background Post-burn hypertrophic scars commonly occur after burns. Studies that compare dermal substitutes with other treatment methods are insufficient. The purpose was to analyze the histopathological differences in hypertrophic burn scars after Matriderm®+split-thickness skin graft (STSG) and compare with AlloDerm®+STSG, STSG, full-thickness skin graft (FTSG), and normal skin. Methods Samples of unburned, normal skin and deep 2nd or 3rd degree burns were obtained from patients who experienced a burn injury in the past to at least 6 months before biopsy, which was performed between 2011 and 2012. All subjects received >6 months of treatment before the biopsy. Intervention groups were normal (63), STSG (28), FTSG (6), Matriderm® (11), and AlloDerm® (18). Immunohistochemical analyses of elastin, collagen I, collagen III, cluster of differentiation 31 (CD31), smooth muscle actin (α-SMA), and laminin from scar and control tissues were performed and compared. Results α-SMA vascular quantity and vessel width, stromal CD31, and basement membrane laminin expression were not significantly different between normal and intervention groups. Matriderm® group showed no significant difference in elastin, collagen III, stromal CD31 and α-SMA, CD31 vessel width, stromal α-SMA, vessel quantity and width, and laminin length compared to the normal group, meaning they were not significantly different from the normal skin traits. Conclusion Dermal substitutes may be an optimal alternative to address the cosmetic and functional limitations posed by other treatment methods.
皮肤代用品治疗烧伤后瘢痕的免疫组织化学分析
背景:烧伤后增生性瘢痕常见于烧伤后。将真皮替代品与其他治疗方法进行比较的研究是不够的。目的分析Matriderm®+裂厚皮移植(STSG)后增生性烧伤瘢痕的组织病理学差异,并与AlloDerm®+STSG、STSG、全层皮移植(FTSG)和正常皮肤进行比较。方法选取2011年至2012年在活检前至少6个月有过烧伤经历的患者,选取未烧伤、正常皮肤和深度2度或3度烧伤标本。所有受试者在活检前均接受了>6个月的治疗。干预组为normal(63)、STSG(28)、FTSG(6)、Matriderm®(11)、AlloDerm®(18)。对瘢痕组织和对照组织中的弹性蛋白、ⅰ型胶原、ⅲ型胶原、CD31簇、平滑肌肌动蛋白(α-SMA)和层粘连蛋白进行免疫组化分析并进行比较。结果α-SMA血管数量、血管宽度、间质CD31、基底膜层粘连蛋白表达在正常组和干预组间无显著差异。Matriderm®组与正常组相比,弹性蛋白、III型胶原、间质CD31和α-SMA、CD31血管宽度、间质α-SMA、血管数量和宽度、层粘连蛋白长度均无显著差异,与正常组相比无显著差异。结论真皮替代品可能是解决其他治疗方法在美容和功能上的局限性的最佳选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信