Histomorphometric analysis of excisional cutaneous wounds with different diameters in an animal model

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 PATHOLOGY International Journal of Experimental Pathology Pub Date : 2024-10-22 DOI:10.1111/iep.12520
Janiele Staianov, Jeiciele Mayara Rodrigues Struz, Rafaela Viana Vieira, Rafael Messias Luiz, Ana Carla Zarpelon-Schutz, Kádima Nayara Teixeira, Juliana Bernardi-Wenzel
{"title":"Histomorphometric analysis of excisional cutaneous wounds with different diameters in an animal model","authors":"Janiele Staianov,&nbsp;Jeiciele Mayara Rodrigues Struz,&nbsp;Rafaela Viana Vieira,&nbsp;Rafael Messias Luiz,&nbsp;Ana Carla Zarpelon-Schutz,&nbsp;Kádima Nayara Teixeira,&nbsp;Juliana Bernardi-Wenzel","doi":"10.1111/iep.12520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The skin wound model in rats is a fundamental stage in preclinical trials, but there is a lack of standardization in these trials regarding the initial wound area, making analysis and comparison between studies difficult. Therefore, this study evaluates the healing progression of excisional skin lesions of varying diameters in Wistar rats, aiming to identify the optimal wound size for monitoring treatment effects on wound healing. Excisions of 0.8, 1.5, 2.0 and 3.0 cm in diameter were made on the back of the animals. Thirty animals were used per treatment and evaluated on days 3, 7, 10, 14 and 21 after surgery. The lesions were cleaned daily with saline solution until they were completely closed. The 0.8 cm group showed complete repair on D14, while in the other groups, the wounds persisted until day 21, with a reddened surface and no complete epidermal coverage, but with greater keratinization and presence of appendages in the 1.5 cm lesions. Therefore, as a standardization model for creating skin wounds, we suggest using 1.5 or 2.0 cm excisions, considering that 0.8 cm wounds close very early and 3.0 cm wounds, although behaving similarly to 2.0 cm wounds, are more invasive for the animals. The 1.5 cm model proved to be suitable for closure within 21 days. When evaluating a product intended to accelerate wound healing, 2.0 cm lesions are recommended to assess the effectiveness of the treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":14157,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Experimental Pathology","volume":"105 6","pages":"235-245"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Experimental Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/iep.12520","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The skin wound model in rats is a fundamental stage in preclinical trials, but there is a lack of standardization in these trials regarding the initial wound area, making analysis and comparison between studies difficult. Therefore, this study evaluates the healing progression of excisional skin lesions of varying diameters in Wistar rats, aiming to identify the optimal wound size for monitoring treatment effects on wound healing. Excisions of 0.8, 1.5, 2.0 and 3.0 cm in diameter were made on the back of the animals. Thirty animals were used per treatment and evaluated on days 3, 7, 10, 14 and 21 after surgery. The lesions were cleaned daily with saline solution until they were completely closed. The 0.8 cm group showed complete repair on D14, while in the other groups, the wounds persisted until day 21, with a reddened surface and no complete epidermal coverage, but with greater keratinization and presence of appendages in the 1.5 cm lesions. Therefore, as a standardization model for creating skin wounds, we suggest using 1.5 or 2.0 cm excisions, considering that 0.8 cm wounds close very early and 3.0 cm wounds, although behaving similarly to 2.0 cm wounds, are more invasive for the animals. The 1.5 cm model proved to be suitable for closure within 21 days. When evaluating a product intended to accelerate wound healing, 2.0 cm lesions are recommended to assess the effectiveness of the treatment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在动物模型中对不同直径的切除皮肤伤口进行组织形态分析。
大鼠皮肤伤口模型是临床前试验的一个基本阶段,但这些试验在初始伤口面积方面缺乏标准化,因此很难对不同研究进行分析和比较。因此,本研究评估了 Wistar 大鼠不同直径切除皮肤损伤的愈合进展,旨在确定最佳伤口大小,以监测治疗对伤口愈合的影响。在动物背部分别切除直径为 0.8、1.5、2.0 和 3.0 厘米的皮肤。每个疗程使用 30 只动物,分别在术后第 3、7、10、14 和 21 天进行评估。每天用生理盐水清洗病灶,直至完全闭合。0.8 厘米组的伤口在第 14 天完全修复,而其他组的伤口则持续到第 21 天,表面发红,表皮没有完全覆盖,但 1.5 厘米组的伤口角质化程度更高,并出现附属物。因此,考虑到 0.8 厘米的伤口很早就会闭合,而 3.0 厘米的伤口虽然与 2.0 厘米的伤口表现相似,但对动物的伤害更大,我们建议使用 1.5 厘米或 2.0 厘米的伤口作为制造皮肤伤口的标准化模型。事实证明,1.5 厘米的模型适合在 21 天内闭合。在评估旨在加速伤口愈合的产品时,建议使用 2.0 厘米的伤口来评估治疗效果。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.30%
发文量
35
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Experimental Pathology encompasses the use of multidisciplinary scientific techniques to investigate the pathogenesis and progression of pathologic processes. The International Journal of Experimental Pathology - IJEP - publishes papers which afford new and imaginative insights into the basic mechanisms underlying human disease, including in vitro work, animal models, and clinical research. Aiming to report on work that addresses the common theme of mechanism at a cellular and molecular level, IJEP publishes both original experimental investigations and review articles. Recent themes for review series have covered topics as diverse as "Viruses and Cancer", "Granulomatous Diseases", "Stem cells" and "Cardiovascular Pathology".
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Histomorphometric analysis of excisional cutaneous wounds with different diameters in an animal model Determination of osteopontin in monitoring retinal damage in metabolic syndrome Enhanced hepatoprotective effects of empagliflozin and vitamin D dual therapy against metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis in mice by boosted modulation of metabolic, oxidative stress, and inflammatory pathways Issue Information
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1