Design matters: A comparison of natural versus synthetic skin substitutes across benchtop and porcine wound healing metrics: An experimental study

Abstract Background and Aims Skin substitutes, essential tools for helping close full thickness wounds with minimal scarring, are available in both collagen‐based and synthetic polyurethane constructions. Here we explore fundamental differences between two frequently used skin substitutes and discus...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Victoria L. Stefanelli, Benjamin Mintz, Ankur Gandhi, Jason Smith
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2023-08-01
Series:Health Science Reports
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.1462
_version_ 1797542986100244480
author Victoria L. Stefanelli
Benjamin Mintz
Ankur Gandhi
Jason Smith
author_facet Victoria L. Stefanelli
Benjamin Mintz
Ankur Gandhi
Jason Smith
author_sort Victoria L. Stefanelli
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background and Aims Skin substitutes, essential tools for helping close full thickness wounds with minimal scarring, are available in both collagen‐based and synthetic polyurethane constructions. Here we explore fundamental differences between two frequently used skin substitutes and discuss how these differences may impact in vivo performance. Methods Polyurethane‐ and collagen‐based matrices were characterized in vitro for pore size via scanning electron microscopy, hydrophobicity via liquid contact angle, conformability via bending angle, and biocompatibility via fibroblast and keratinocyte adhesion and proliferation. These matrices were then evaluated in a full‐thickness excisional pig wound study followed by histological analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using t‐tests or one‐way analysis of variances with Tukey's multiple post hoc comparisons, where appropriate. Results Average pore diameter in the tested polyurethane matrix was over four times larger than that of the collagen matrix (589 ± 297 µm vs. 132 ± 91 µm). Through liquid contact angle measurement, the collagen matrix (not measurable) was found to be hydrophilic compared to the hydrophobic polyurethane matrix (>90°). The collagen matrix was significantly more conformable than the polyurethane matrix (9 ± 2° vs. 84 ± 5° bending angle, respectively). Fibroblast and keratinocyte adhesion and proliferation assays elucidated a significantly greater ability of both cell types to attach and proliferate on collagen versus polyurethane. While the porcine study showed minimal contraction of either matrix material, histological findings between the two treatments were markedly different. Collagen matrices were associated with early fibroblast infiltration and fibroplasia, whereas polyurethane matrices elicited a strong multinucleated giant cell response and produced a network of comparatively aligned collagen fibrils. Conclusions The more favorable in vitro properties of the collagen matrix led to less inflammation and better overall tissue response in vivo. Overall, our findings demonstrate how the choice of biomaterial and its design directly translate to differing in vivo mechanisms of action and overall tissue quality.
first_indexed 2024-03-10T13:38:17Z
format Article
id doaj.art-f1de72673ee543b19b95ad791e106688
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2398-8835
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-10T13:38:17Z
publishDate 2023-08-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Health Science Reports
spelling doaj.art-f1de72673ee543b19b95ad791e1066882023-11-21T06:37:12ZengWileyHealth Science Reports2398-88352023-08-0168n/an/a10.1002/hsr2.1462Design matters: A comparison of natural versus synthetic skin substitutes across benchtop and porcine wound healing metrics: An experimental studyVictoria L. Stefanelli0Benjamin Mintz1Ankur Gandhi2Jason Smith3Exploratory R&D Integra LifeSciences Princeton New Jersey USAExploratory R&D Integra LifeSciences Princeton New Jersey USAExploratory R&D Integra LifeSciences Princeton New Jersey USAExploratory R&D Integra LifeSciences Princeton New Jersey USAAbstract Background and Aims Skin substitutes, essential tools for helping close full thickness wounds with minimal scarring, are available in both collagen‐based and synthetic polyurethane constructions. Here we explore fundamental differences between two frequently used skin substitutes and discuss how these differences may impact in vivo performance. Methods Polyurethane‐ and collagen‐based matrices were characterized in vitro for pore size via scanning electron microscopy, hydrophobicity via liquid contact angle, conformability via bending angle, and biocompatibility via fibroblast and keratinocyte adhesion and proliferation. These matrices were then evaluated in a full‐thickness excisional pig wound study followed by histological analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using t‐tests or one‐way analysis of variances with Tukey's multiple post hoc comparisons, where appropriate. Results Average pore diameter in the tested polyurethane matrix was over four times larger than that of the collagen matrix (589 ± 297 µm vs. 132 ± 91 µm). Through liquid contact angle measurement, the collagen matrix (not measurable) was found to be hydrophilic compared to the hydrophobic polyurethane matrix (>90°). The collagen matrix was significantly more conformable than the polyurethane matrix (9 ± 2° vs. 84 ± 5° bending angle, respectively). Fibroblast and keratinocyte adhesion and proliferation assays elucidated a significantly greater ability of both cell types to attach and proliferate on collagen versus polyurethane. While the porcine study showed minimal contraction of either matrix material, histological findings between the two treatments were markedly different. Collagen matrices were associated with early fibroblast infiltration and fibroplasia, whereas polyurethane matrices elicited a strong multinucleated giant cell response and produced a network of comparatively aligned collagen fibrils. Conclusions The more favorable in vitro properties of the collagen matrix led to less inflammation and better overall tissue response in vivo. Overall, our findings demonstrate how the choice of biomaterial and its design directly translate to differing in vivo mechanisms of action and overall tissue quality.https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.1462fibroblastspolyurethaneskin substituteswounds
spellingShingle Victoria L. Stefanelli
Benjamin Mintz
Ankur Gandhi
Jason Smith
Design matters: A comparison of natural versus synthetic skin substitutes across benchtop and porcine wound healing metrics: An experimental study
Health Science Reports
fibroblasts
polyurethane
skin substitutes
wounds
title Design matters: A comparison of natural versus synthetic skin substitutes across benchtop and porcine wound healing metrics: An experimental study
title_full Design matters: A comparison of natural versus synthetic skin substitutes across benchtop and porcine wound healing metrics: An experimental study
title_fullStr Design matters: A comparison of natural versus synthetic skin substitutes across benchtop and porcine wound healing metrics: An experimental study
title_full_unstemmed Design matters: A comparison of natural versus synthetic skin substitutes across benchtop and porcine wound healing metrics: An experimental study
title_short Design matters: A comparison of natural versus synthetic skin substitutes across benchtop and porcine wound healing metrics: An experimental study
title_sort design matters a comparison of natural versus synthetic skin substitutes across benchtop and porcine wound healing metrics an experimental study
topic fibroblasts
polyurethane
skin substitutes
wounds
url https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.1462
work_keys_str_mv AT victorialstefanelli designmattersacomparisonofnaturalversussyntheticskinsubstitutesacrossbenchtopandporcinewoundhealingmetricsanexperimentalstudy
AT benjaminmintz designmattersacomparisonofnaturalversussyntheticskinsubstitutesacrossbenchtopandporcinewoundhealingmetricsanexperimentalstudy
AT ankurgandhi designmattersacomparisonofnaturalversussyntheticskinsubstitutesacrossbenchtopandporcinewoundhealingmetricsanexperimentalstudy
AT jasonsmith designmattersacomparisonofnaturalversussyntheticskinsubstitutesacrossbenchtopandporcinewoundhealingmetricsanexperimentalstudy