Development of theranostic wound dressings: harnessing the knowledge of biospecific interactions at the biomaterial interface to promote healing and identify biomarkers.

IF 2.9 3区医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL

Expert Review of Medical Devices Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1080/17434440.2023.2181694

Shirin Saberianpour, Gianluca Melotto, Rachel Forss, Lucy Redhead, Jacqueline Elsom, Nadia Terrazini, Susan Sandeman, Dipak Sarker, Giselda Bucca, Andrew Hesketh, Cyril Crua, Matteo Santin

{"title":"Development of theranostic wound dressings: harnessing the knowledge of biospecific interactions at the biomaterial interface to promote healing and identify biomarkers.","authors":"Shirin Saberianpour, Gianluca Melotto, Rachel Forss, Lucy Redhead, Jacqueline Elsom, Nadia Terrazini, Susan Sandeman, Dipak Sarker, Giselda Bucca, Andrew Hesketh, Cyril Crua, Matteo Santin","doi":"10.1080/17434440.2023.2181694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chronic wounds are widely recognized as a global health challenge, but both our understanding of wound biology and the implementation of technological innovations for their treatment have made only limited progress in the last few decades [1]. Currently, the clinical assessment of the wound is based on the experience of the clinicians who follow recommendations taken from a range of available guidelines and choose commercially available wound dressings on the basis of their suitability to the wound conditions [2]. For example, the Wounds UK’s best practice statement on the management of chronic wounds recommends several criteria for the assessment of lesions that are mainly based on a subjective clinical inspection of the overall wound bed and peri-wound area status (e.g. inflammation), the exudate volume and viscosity, pain, and infectiongenerated malodor. Methods of wound size measurement provide quantitative data, but they suffer from limited intra-rater reliability. Likewise, the choice of the most suitable wound dressing is made with the aim of providing biological conditions favorable to healing. Despite the wide range available, wound dressings are all designed with two main characteristics: (i) an absorbent layer made of a polymeric porous hydrogel capable of absorbing excess exudate while keeping the wound moist and (ii) a film (e.g. silicon) protecting the wound from external contaminants and bacteria [3]. More advanced wound dressings include anti-microbial agents (e.g. silver nanoparticles) or growth factors known to promote healing [3]. The use of the latter is limited by their costs, need for refrigerated storage conditions, and debated healing properties. In this context, up to 42% of wounds do not heal within 6 months from the first presentation, often leading to severe complications [4]. Based on these premises, the quest for both healing-promoting wound dressings and objective parameters of wound evaluation is legitimately advocated. 2. Theranostic wound dressings","PeriodicalId":12330,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Medical Devices","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Medical Devices","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2023.2181694","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Chronic wounds are widely recognized as a global health challenge, but both our understanding of wound biology and the implementation of technological innovations for their treatment have made only limited progress in the last few decades [1]. Currently, the clinical assessment of the wound is based on the experience of the clinicians who follow recommendations taken from a range of available guidelines and choose commercially available wound dressings on the basis of their suitability to the wound conditions [2]. For example, the Wounds UK’s best practice statement on the management of chronic wounds recommends several criteria for the assessment of lesions that are mainly based on a subjective clinical inspection of the overall wound bed and peri-wound area status (e.g. inflammation), the exudate volume and viscosity, pain, and infectiongenerated malodor. Methods of wound size measurement provide quantitative data, but they suffer from limited intra-rater reliability. Likewise, the choice of the most suitable wound dressing is made with the aim of providing biological conditions favorable to healing. Despite the wide range available, wound dressings are all designed with two main characteristics: (i) an absorbent layer made of a polymeric porous hydrogel capable of absorbing excess exudate while keeping the wound moist and (ii) a film (e.g. silicon) protecting the wound from external contaminants and bacteria [3]. More advanced wound dressings include anti-microbial agents (e.g. silver nanoparticles) or growth factors known to promote healing [3]. The use of the latter is limited by their costs, need for refrigerated storage conditions, and debated healing properties. In this context, up to 42% of wounds do not heal within 6 months from the first presentation, often leading to severe complications [4]. Based on these premises, the quest for both healing-promoting wound dressings and objective parameters of wound evaluation is legitimately advocated. 2. Theranostic wound dressings

查看原文本刊更多论文

治疗性伤口敷料的发展:利用生物材料界面上生物特异性相互作用的知识来促进愈合和识别生物标志物。

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

Expert Review of Medical Devices 医学-工程：生物医学

CiteScore

5.90

自引率

3.20%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The journal serves the device research community by providing a comprehensive body of high-quality information from leading experts, all subject to rigorous peer review. The Expert Review format is specially structured to optimize the value of the information to reader. Comprehensive coverage by each author in a key area of research or clinical practice is augmented by the following sections: Expert commentary - a personal view on the most effective or promising strategies Five-year view - a clear perspective of future prospects within a realistic timescale Key issues - an executive summary cutting to the author''s most critical points In addition to the Review program, each issue also features Medical Device Profiles - objective assessments of specific devices in development or clinical use to help inform clinical practice. There are also Perspectives - overviews highlighting areas of current debate and controversy, together with reports from the conference scene and invited Editorials.