Kimberly De Mey , Ignace De Decker , Rodney Gush , Henk Hoeksema , Jozef Verbelen , Petra De Coninck , Phillip Blondeel , Stan Monstrey , Karel E.Y. Claes
{"title":"Validity of laser speckle contrast imaging for predicting wound healing potential in burns: A critical examination","authors":"Kimberly De Mey , Ignace De Decker , Rodney Gush , Henk Hoeksema , Jozef Verbelen , Petra De Coninck , Phillip Blondeel , Stan Monstrey , Karel E.Y. Claes","doi":"10.1016/j.burns.2025.107449","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Accurate assessment of burn depth is imperative for the efficacious management of burns. Although clinical assessment is commonly used, its accuracy ranges only between 50 % and 70 %. Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) is considered as a gold standard - with an accuracy exceeding 95 %, - for the objective measurement of Healing Potential (HP), HP being the output of the LDI device, as colour-coded on LDI blood flow images. Despite its proven efficacy, widespread adoption is impeded by practical challenges. Laser Speckle Contrast Imaging (LSCI) emerges as a possible alternative. This study investigated the performance and accuracy of LSCI in comparison with LDI for predicting the HP of burns; LDI was assumed to provide ‘ground truth’ for the assessment of HP.</div></div><div><h3><em>Methods</em></h3><div>Hospitalized burn patients underwent LDI and LSCI scans between day 2 and day 5 postburn. Analysis involved selecting corresponding regions of interest (ROI) in target wounds prioritized by LDI and LSCI perspectives.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In 19 patients, 112 ROI within LDI-priority ranges were collected from 50 target wounds. 130 ROI within LSCI-priority ranges were collected from 52 target wounds. Positive predictive values (PPV) were low, at only 50.8 % and 68.2 % for HP14–21 and HP21, respectively, and 86.9 % for HP14.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Objective assessment by LSCI for burns is not recommended, as it fails to detect deep dermal blood flow, leading to an overestimation of burn severity and potential inadequacies in therapy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50717,"journal":{"name":"Burns","volume":"51 4","pages":"Article 107449"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Burns","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305417925000786","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Accurate assessment of burn depth is imperative for the efficacious management of burns. Although clinical assessment is commonly used, its accuracy ranges only between 50 % and 70 %. Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) is considered as a gold standard - with an accuracy exceeding 95 %, - for the objective measurement of Healing Potential (HP), HP being the output of the LDI device, as colour-coded on LDI blood flow images. Despite its proven efficacy, widespread adoption is impeded by practical challenges. Laser Speckle Contrast Imaging (LSCI) emerges as a possible alternative. This study investigated the performance and accuracy of LSCI in comparison with LDI for predicting the HP of burns; LDI was assumed to provide ‘ground truth’ for the assessment of HP.
Methods
Hospitalized burn patients underwent LDI and LSCI scans between day 2 and day 5 postburn. Analysis involved selecting corresponding regions of interest (ROI) in target wounds prioritized by LDI and LSCI perspectives.
Results
In 19 patients, 112 ROI within LDI-priority ranges were collected from 50 target wounds. 130 ROI within LSCI-priority ranges were collected from 52 target wounds. Positive predictive values (PPV) were low, at only 50.8 % and 68.2 % for HP14–21 and HP21, respectively, and 86.9 % for HP14.
Conclusion
Objective assessment by LSCI for burns is not recommended, as it fails to detect deep dermal blood flow, leading to an overestimation of burn severity and potential inadequacies in therapy.
期刊介绍:
Burns aims to foster the exchange of information among all engaged in preventing and treating the effects of burns. The journal focuses on clinical, scientific and social aspects of these injuries and covers the prevention of the injury, the epidemiology of such injuries and all aspects of treatment including development of new techniques and technologies and verification of existing ones. Regular features include clinical and scientific papers, state of the art reviews and descriptions of burn-care in practice.
Topics covered by Burns include: the effects of smoke on man and animals, their tissues and cells; the responses to and treatment of patients and animals with chemical injuries to the skin; the biological and clinical effects of cold injuries; surgical techniques which are, or may be relevant to the treatment of burned patients during the acute or reconstructive phase following injury; well controlled laboratory studies of the effectiveness of anti-microbial agents on infection and new materials on scarring and healing; inflammatory responses to injury, effectiveness of related agents and other compounds used to modify the physiological and cellular responses to the injury; experimental studies of burns and the outcome of burn wound healing; regenerative medicine concerning the skin.