M. Primasari, I. D. Saputro, L. Hariani, Glorian Paul Bosco Velusamy
{"title":"Developing Porcine Acellular Dermal Matrix by Using Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate and Biomechanical Property Testing","authors":"M. Primasari, I. D. Saputro, L. Hariani, Glorian Paul Bosco Velusamy","doi":"10.4103/bhsj.bhsj_2_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n \n \n \n An alternative for supporting wound closure is acellular dermal matrix (ADM), which serves as a scaffold. Humans and porcine possess a similar biochemical makeup. Using sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), a decellularization technique was developed and its biomechanical properties were assessed.\n \n \n \n This work uses a pig dermis layer for an in vitro experimental investigation with a posttest-only control group. Using SDS 0.5% for 14 days, the decellularization procedure compares the biomechanical properties and cellular components of the ADM with control. The Mann–Whitney U-test for data with a nonnormal distribution or the t-test for continuous variables with a normal distribution was used for the study.\n \n \n \n Histological analysis revealed that none of the cells were detected in four fields of analysis in the treatment group; however, 48.00 ± 4.86 cells were observed in the control group (P < 0.001); the collagen organization in the control group appeared to be identical. The variables elastic modulus (MPa) (136.78 vs. 129.19; P = 0.556), thickness (mm) (3.27 vs. 3.15; P = 0.397), and width (mm) (8.50 vs. 8.56; P = 0.40) did not differ statistically. The following data showed significant differences between the treatment group and the control group: break strain (%) (108.46 vs. 67.48; P < 0.001) and tensile strength stress (MPa) (19.916 vs. 22.1; P = 0.030).\n \n \n \n SDS decellularization is an efficient method for creating an ADM. Although the break strain was considerably lower, the treatment group’s tensile strength was higher. Elastic modulus changes were not observed.\n","PeriodicalId":9324,"journal":{"name":"Biomolecular and Health Science Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomolecular and Health Science Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/bhsj.bhsj_2_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT
An alternative for supporting wound closure is acellular dermal matrix (ADM), which serves as a scaffold. Humans and porcine possess a similar biochemical makeup. Using sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), a decellularization technique was developed and its biomechanical properties were assessed.
This work uses a pig dermis layer for an in vitro experimental investigation with a posttest-only control group. Using SDS 0.5% for 14 days, the decellularization procedure compares the biomechanical properties and cellular components of the ADM with control. The Mann–Whitney U-test for data with a nonnormal distribution or the t-test for continuous variables with a normal distribution was used for the study.
Histological analysis revealed that none of the cells were detected in four fields of analysis in the treatment group; however, 48.00 ± 4.86 cells were observed in the control group (P < 0.001); the collagen organization in the control group appeared to be identical. The variables elastic modulus (MPa) (136.78 vs. 129.19; P = 0.556), thickness (mm) (3.27 vs. 3.15; P = 0.397), and width (mm) (8.50 vs. 8.56; P = 0.40) did not differ statistically. The following data showed significant differences between the treatment group and the control group: break strain (%) (108.46 vs. 67.48; P < 0.001) and tensile strength stress (MPa) (19.916 vs. 22.1; P = 0.030).
SDS decellularization is an efficient method for creating an ADM. Although the break strain was considerably lower, the treatment group’s tensile strength was higher. Elastic modulus changes were not observed.