Advertisement

Burn Dressing Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering

  • Lauren E. Flynn
  • Kimberly A. Woodhouse
Chapter

The skin is the largest organ of the body, ranging in size from 1.5 to 2.0 m2 in adults [1]. This highly-organized composite structure fulfils a wide variety of functions critical to the maintenance of homeostasis [2]. Burns, caused by thermal, chemical, or electrical injuries, can result in severe and irreparable damage to the skin, leading to wound contracture, scar tissue formation, and a loss of functionality. In the United States, between 60,000 and 80,000 patients are hospitalized annually for the treatment of serious burns [3, 4]. The average cost of patient care, reconstruction, and rehabilitation is extremely high, especially in severe or extensive cases [5]. Improvements in resuscitation techniques now facilitate the survival of patients with major burns extending over more than 90% of their bodies [6].

Keywords

Hair Follicle Skin Substitute Scar Tissue Formation Dermal Substitute Thickness Burn 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Balasubramani M, Kumar TR, and Babu M. Skin substitutes: a review. Burns, 2001, 27: 534–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Haake A, Scott GA, and Holbrook KA. Structure and function of the skin: overview of the epidermis and dermis, in Freinkel, RK and Woodley, DT, eds. The Biology of the Skin, The Parthenon Publishing Group Inc.: New York, 2001, pp. 19–45.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pruitt BA and Mason AD. Epidemiological, demographic and outcome characteristics of burn injury, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.B. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 5–15.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sheridan RL. Burns. Criti Care Med, 2002, 30S: S500–S514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sjoberg F, et al. Utility of an intervention scoring system in documenting effects of changes in burn treatment. Burns, 2000, 26: 553–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nguyen TT, et al. Current treatment of severely burned patients. Ann Surg, 1996, 223: 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Quinn KJ, et al. Principles of burn dressings. Biomaterials, 1985, 6: 369–377.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Muller MJ, et al. Modern treatment of a burn wound, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.B. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 136–147.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berthod F and Rouabhia M. Exhaustive review of clinical alternatives for damaged skin replacement, in Rouabhia, M, ed. Skin Substitute Production by Tissue Engineering, Chapman and Hall: New York, 1997, pp. 23–45.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jones I, Currie L, and Martin R. A guide to biological skin substitutes. Br J Plast Surg, 2002, 55: 185–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boyce ST and Warden GD. Principles and practices for treatment of cutaneous wounds with cultured skin substitutes. Am J Surg, 2002, 183: 445–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brown AS and Barot LR. Biologic dressings and skin substitutes. Clin Plast Surg, 1986, 13: 69–74.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tortora GT and Anagnostakos NP. Principles of Anatomy and Physiology: 2nd edn. Harper & Row Publishers: New York, 1975, pp. 104–114.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Burgeson RE and Christiano AM. The dermal-epidermal junction. Curr Opin Cell Biol, 1997, 9: 651–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rouabhia M. Structural and functional complexity of the skin, in Rouabhia, M, ed. Skin Substitute Production by Tissue Engineering, R.G. Landes Company: Austin, 1997, pp. 3–22.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gupta S and Sauder DN. The skin as an immune organ: the role of keratinocyte cytokines. Univ Toronto Med J, 1995, 72: 118–123.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Smack DP, Korge BP, and James, WD. Keratin and keratinization. JAm Acad Dermatol, 1994, 30: 85–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Latkowski JA and Freedberg IM. Epidermal cell kinetics, epidermal differentiation and keratinization, in Freedberg, IM, et al., eds. Fitzpatrick's Dermatology in General Medicine, McGraw-Hill: New York, 1999, pp. 133–143.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Steinert PM. The two-chain coiled-coil molecule of native epidermal keratin intermediate filaments is a type I-type II heterodimer. J Biol Chem, 1990, 265: 8766–8774.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moll R, et al. The catalog of human cytokeratins: patterns of expression in normal epithelia, tumors and cultured cells. Cell, 1982, 31: 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sun TT. Classification, expression and possible mechanisms of evolution of mammalian epithelial keratins: a unifying model. Cancer Cell, 1984, 1: 169–176.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Valyi-Nagy IT, et al., Undifferentiated keratinocytes control growth, morphology and antigen expression of normal melanocytes through cell-cell contact. Lab Invest, 1993, 69: 152–159.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gordon PR, Mansur CP, and Gilchrest BA. Regulation of human melanocyte growth, dendricity, and melanization by keratinocyte derived factors. J Invest Dermatol, 1989, 92: 565–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Martini FH, Timmons MJ, and Mackinley MP. Human Anatomy. Prentice-Hall Inc.: New Jersey, 2000, pp. 88–107.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nordlund JJ and Boissy RE. The biology of melanocytes, in Freinkel, RK and Woodley, DT, eds. The Biology of Skin, The Parthenon Publishing Group: New York, 2001, pp. 113–131.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yamamoto O and Bhawan J., Three modes of melanosome transfers in caucasian facial skin: hypothesis based on an ultrastructural study. Pigment Cell Res, 1994, 7: 158–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Boissy RE and Nordlund JJ., Biology of melanocytes, in Arndt, KA, et al., eds. Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery, W.B. Saunders Company Ltd.: Philadelphia, 1996, pp. 1203–1218.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Post PW and Rao DC., Genetic and environmental determinants of skin colour. Am J Phys Anthropol, 1977, 47: 399–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tachibana T. The Merkel cell: recent findings and unresolved problems. Arch Histolo Cytol, 1995, 58: 379–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fantini F and Johansson O. Neurochemical markers in human cutaneous Merkel cells. Exp Dermatol, 1995, 4: 365–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Narisawa Y., et al. Biological significance of dermal Merkel cells in the development of cutaneous nerves in human fetal skin. J Histochem Cytochem, 1992, 40: 65–71.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sauder DN and Pastore S., Cytokines in contact dermititis. Am J Contact Dermat, 1993, 4: 215–224.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sauder DN The skin as an immunologic organ, in Soter, NA, ed. Pathophysiology of Dermatologic Diseases, McGraw-Hill Inc.: New York, 1991, pp. 101–110.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bos JD and Kapsenberg ML., The skin immune system. Immunol Today, 1986, 7: 235–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Barratt-Boys SM, Watkins SC, and Finn OJ., In vivo migration of dendritic cells differentiated in vitro. J Immunol, 1997, 158: 4543–4547.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Romani N, Lenz A, and Glassel H., Cultured human Langerhans cells resemble lymphoid dendritic cells in phenotype and function. J Invest Dermatol, 1989, 93: 600–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Groux H, Fournier N, and Cottrez F., Role of dendritic cells in the generation of regulatory T cells. Semin Immunol, 2004, 16: 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jones ND, et al. Differential susceptibility of heart, skin and islet allografts to T-cell mediated rejection. J Immunol, 2001, 166: 2824–2830.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Erdag G and Sheridan RL. Fibroblasts improve performance of cultured composite skin substitutes on athymic mice. Burns, 2004, 30: 322–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hornebeck W. Down-regulation of tissue inhibitor matrix metalloprotease-1 (TIMP-1) in aged human skin contributes to matrix degradation and impaired cell growth and survival. Pathol Biol, 2003, 51: 569–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lavker RM and Sun T. Heterogeneity in epidermal basal keratinocytes: morphological and functional correlations. Science, 1982, 15: 1239–1241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lavker RM and Sun TT. Epidermal stem cells. J Invest Dermatol, 1983, 81: 121S–127S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Janes SM, Lowell S, and Hutter C. Epidermal stem cells. J Pathol, 2002, 197: 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Barrandon Y and Green H. Three clonal types of keratinocyte with different capacities for multiplication. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1987, 84: 2302–2306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Germain L, et al. Skin stem cell identification and culture: a potential tool for rapid epidermal sheet production and grafting, in Rouabhia, M, ed. Skin Substitute Production by Tissue Engineering, R.G. Landes Company: Austin, 2001, pp. 177–210.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Brody I. The ultrastructure of the tonofibrils in the keratinization process of normal human epidermis. J Ultrastruct Res, 1960, 4: 264–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Fuchs E and Cleveland D. A structural scaffolding of intermediate filaments in health and disease. Science, 1998, 279: 514–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fukuyama K, Kakimi S, and Epstein WL. Detection of a fibrous component in keratohyalin granules of newborn rat epidermis. J Invest Dermatol, 1980, 74: 174–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Yaffe MB and Eckert RL. Involucrin, type-I and type-II keratins and filaggrin are covalently cross-linked components of the keratinocyte cornified envelope. Clin Res, 1992, 40: A522–A522.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Eckert RL, et al. Involucrin – structure and role in envelope assembly. J Invest Dermatol, 1993, 100: 613–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hohl D. Cornified cellular envelope. Dermatologica, 1990, 180: 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    McCall CA and Cohen JJ. Programmed cell death in terminally differentiating keratinocytes: role of endogenous endonuclease. J Invest Dermatol, 1991, 97: 111–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wrone-Smith T, et al. Keratinocytes from psoriatic plaques are resistant to apoptosis compared with normal skin. Am J Pathol, 1997, 151: 1321–1329.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Elias PM. Epidermal lipids, barrier function, and desquamation. J Invest Dermatol, 1983, 80: 44S–49S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Weinstein GD and Boucek RJ. Collagen and elastin of human dermis. JInvest Dermatol, 1960, 35: 227–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Smith LT, Holbrook KA, and Byers HP. Structure of the dermal matrix during development and in the adult. J Invest Dermatol, 1982, 79: 93S–104S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Bruckner-Tuderman L, Hopfner B, and Hammami-Hauasli N. Biology of anchoring fibrils: lessons from dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa. Matrix Biol, 1999, 18: 43–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Pulkkinen L and Uitto J. Mutation analysis and molecular genetics of epidermolysis bullosa. Matrix Biol, 1999, 18: 29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Braverman IM. The cutaneous microcirculation. J Invest Dermatol Symp, 2000, 5: 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Metze D and Luger T. Nervous system in the skin, in Freinkel, RK and Woodley, DT, eds. The Biology of the Skin, The Parthenon Publishing Group: New York, 2001, pp. 153–176.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Skobe M and Detmar M. Structure, function and molecular control of the skin and lymphatic system. J Invest Dermatol Symp, 2000, 5: 14–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Tzaphildou M. The role of collagen and elastin in aged skin: an image processing approach. Micron, 2004, 35: 873–877.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Kielty CM and Shuttleworth CA. Microfibrillar elements of the dermal matrix. Microsc Res Tech, 1997, 38: 413–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Garrone R, Distribution of minor collagens during skin development. Microsc Res Tech, 1997, 38: 407–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Keene DR, Marinkovich MP, and Sakai LY. Immunodissection of the connective tissue matrix in human skin. Microsc Res Tech, 1997, 38: 394–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Pasquali-Ronchetti I and Baccareni-Contri M. Elastic fiber during development and aging. Microsc Res Techn, 1997, 38: 428–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Fosang AJ and Hardingham TE. Matrix proteoglycans, in Comper, WD, ed. Extracellular Matrix Volume 2, Molecular Components and Interactions, Harwood Academic Publishers: Amsterdam, 1996, pp. 200–218.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Iozzo RV. Matrix proteoglycans: from molecular design to cellular function. Ann Rev Biochem, 1998, 67: 609–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Saliba MJ. Heparin in the treatment of burns: a review. Burns, 2001, 27: 349–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Savani RC, et al. The role of hyaluronan-receptor interactions in wound repair, in Garg, HG and Longaker, MT, eds. Scarless Wound Healing, Marcel Dekker, Inc.: New York, 2000, pp. 115–142.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Trowbridge JM and Gallo RL. Dermatan sulfate: new functions from an old glycosaminoglycan. Glycobiology, 2002, 126: 117R–125R.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kljaer M. Role of extracellular matrix in adaptation of tendon and skeletal muscle to mechanical loading. Physiol Rev, 2004, 84: 649–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Angulo J, et al. The activation of fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) by glycosaminoglycans: influence of the sulfation pattern on the biological activity of FGF-1. Chem Biochem, 2004, 5: 55–61.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Martinez-Hernadez A and Amenta PS. The basement membrane in pathology. Lab Invest, 1983, 48: 656–677.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Woodley DT and Chen M. The basement membrane zone, in Freinkel, RK and Woodley, DT, eds. The Biology of the Skin, The Parthenon Publishing Group: New York, 2001, pp. 133–135.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Brown TA, Gil SG, and Sybert VP. Defective integrin alpha 6 beta 4 in the skin of patients with junctional epidermolysis bullosa and pyloric atresia. J Invest Dermatol, 1996, 107: 384–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Larjava H, Expression of β1 integrins in normal human keratinocytes. Am J Med Sci, 1991, 301: 63–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Graf J, et al. Identification of an amino acid sequence in laminin mediating cell attachment, chemotaxis, and receptor binding. Cell, 1987, 48: 989–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Bateman JF, Lamande, SR, and Ramshaw, JAM. Collagen superfamily, in Extracellular Matrix Volume 2, Components and Interactions, Comper, WD, ed. Harwood Academic Publishers: Amsterdam, 1996, pp. 22–67.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Katz AJ. Emerging approaches to the tissue engineering of fat. Tissue Eng, 1999, 26: 587–603.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Widelitz RB, et al. Molecular histology in skin appendage morphogenesis. Microsc Res Tech, 1997, 38: 452–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Shakespeare P. Burn wound healing and skin substitutes. Burns, 2001, 27: 517–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Sato K, et al. Biology of the sweat glands and their disorders. I. Normal sweat gland function. J Am Acad Dermatol, 1989, 20: 537–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Hurley HJ. The eccrine sweat glands: structure and function, in Freinkel, RK and Woodley, DT, eds. The Biology of the Skin, The Parthenon Publishing Group: New York, 2001, pp. 47–76.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Speilman AL, et al. Proteinaceous precursors of human axillary odor: isolation of two novel odor-binding proteins. Experientia, 1995, 15: 40–47.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Botek AA and Lookingbill DP. The structure and function of sebaceous glands, in Freinkel, RK and Woodley, DT, eds. The Biology of the Skin, The Parthenon Publishing Group: New York, 2001, 87–100.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Thody AJ and Shuster S. Control and function of sebaceous glands. Physiolo Rev, 1989, 69: 383–416.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Freinkel RK, Hair, in Freinkel, RK and Woodley, DT, eds. The Biology of the Skin, The Parthenon Publishing Group: New York, 2001, pp. 77–86.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Spradling A, Drummond-Barbosa D, and Kai, T. Stem cells find their niche. Nature, 2001, 414: 98–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Akiyama M, et al. Characterization of hair follicle bulge in human fetal skin; the human fetal bulge is a pool of undifferentiated keratinocytes. J Invest Dermatol, 1995, 105: 844–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Levit EK and Scher RK. Basic science of the nail unit, in Freinkel, RK and Woodley, DT, eds. The Biology of the Skin, The Parthenon Publishing Group: New York, 2001, pp. 101–112.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Kitahara T and Ogawa H., Cellular features of differentiation in the nail. Microsc Res Tech, 1997, 38: 436–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Browder LW, Erickson CA, and Jeffrey, WR. Developmental Biology. Philadelphia, 1991, pp. 260–282.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Larsen WJ. Development of the integumentary system, in Human Embryology, 3rd edn. Churchill Livingstone: Philadelphia, 2001, pp. 465–480.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Carlson BM. Integumentary, skeletal and muscular systems, in Human Embryology and Developmental Biology, 2nd edn. Mosby Inc.: St. Louis, 1999, pp. 148–183.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Dye FJ. Human Life Before Birth. Harwood Academic Publishers: Amsterdam, 2000, pp. 97–104.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Toole BP. Hyaluronan in morphogenesis. J Intern Med, 1997, 242: 35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Cook D. Classification of burns, in Bosworth, C, ed. Burns Trauma, Bailliere Tindall: London, 1997, pp. 19–34.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Monafo W, Wound care, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.B. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 88–97.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Williams WG and Phillips LG. Pathophysiology of the burn wound, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.B. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 63–70.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Clark RAF. Wound repair: lessons for tissue engineering, in Lanza, RP, Langer, R, and Chick, WL, eds. Principles of Tissue Engineering, R.G. Landes Company: Austin, 1997, pp. 737–768.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Krisner RS and Eaglstein W. The wound healing process. Wound Healing, 1993, 11: 629–640.Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Martin P. Wound healing – aiming for perfect skin regeneration. Science, 1997, 276: 75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Hardin-Young J and, Parenteau N. Bilayered skin constructs, in Atala, A and Lanza, RP, eds. Methods of Tissue Engineering, Academic Press: San Diego. 2002, pp. 1177–1188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Servold SA. Growth factor impact on wound healing. Clin Podiatr Med Surg, 1991, 8: 937–953.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Pankurst S, Wound care, in Burns Trauma, Bosworth, C, ed. Bailliere Tindall: London, 1997, pp. 63–74.Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Kane JB, Tompkins RG, and Yarmush ML. Burn dressings, in Ratner, BD, et al., eds. Biomaterials Science, Academic Press: San Diego. 1996, pp. 360–370.Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Tuan TL and Nichter LS. The molecular basis of keloid and hypertrophic scar formation. Mol Med Today, 1998, 4: 19–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Rockwell WB, Cohen IK, and Ehrlich HP. Keloid and hypertrophic scars: a comprehensive review. Plast Reconstr Surg, 1989, 84: 827–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Robb EC, et al. A new model for studying the development of human hypertrophic burn scar formation. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1987, 8: 371–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Hindler F and Traber DL. Pathophysiology of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.B. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 207–216.Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Kramer GC and Nguyen TT. Pathophysiology of burn shock and burn edema, Herndon, DN, ed. in Total Burn Care, W.B. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 44–52.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Erol S, et al. Changes of microbial flora and wound colonization in burned patients. Burns, 2004, 30: 357–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Kanchanapoom T and Khardori N. Management of infections in patients with severe burns: impact of multiresistant pathogens. J Burns Surg Wound Care, 2002, 1: 1–7.Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Allgower M, Schoenenberger GA, and Sparkes BG. Burning the largest immune organ. Burns, 1995, 21: S7–S47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Sparkes BG. Immunological responses to thermal injury. Burns, 1997, 23: 106–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Deveci M, et al. Comparison of lymphocyte populations in cutaneous and electrical burn patients: a clinical study. Burns, 2000, 26: 229–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Schwacha MG. Macrophages and post-burn immune dysfunction. Burns, 2003, 29: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Vindenes HA and Bjerknes R. Impaired actin polymerization and depolymerization in neutrophils from patients with thermal injury. Burns, 1997, 23: 131–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Tyler MPH., et al. Dermal cellular inflammation in burns. an insight into the function of dermal microvascular anatomy. Burns, 2001, 27: 433–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Munster AM. The immunological response and strategies for intervention, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.G. Saunders Company Ltd.: London. 1996, pp. 279–292.Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Lu S, et al. Effect of necrotic tissue on progressive injury in deep partial thickness burn wounds. Chin Med J, 2002, 115: 323–325.Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Sheridan RL and Thompkins RG. Etiology and prevention of multisystem organ failure, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.G. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 302–312.Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Sheridan RL. What's new in burns and metabolism. J Am College of Surgeons, 2004, 198: 243–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Hartford CE. Care of out-patient burns, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.G. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 71–80.Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Jones OC. Management of pain in the burns patient, in Bosworth, C, ed. Burns Trauma, Bailliere Tindall: London, 1997, pp. 95–110.Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Wachtel TL. Initial care of major burns. Postgrad Med, 1989, 85: 178–196.Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Warden GD. Fluid resuscitation and early management, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.G. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 53–60.Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Ho WS, et al. Skin care in burn patients: a team approach. Burns, 2001, 27: 489–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Zhi-yang F. Local care in severe burn, in Zhi-yang, F et al., ed. Modern Treatment of Severe Burns, Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1992, pp. 51–63.Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Ryan TJ. Wound healing and current dermatologic dressings. Clin Dermatol, 1990, 8: 21–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Boyce ST. Design principles for composition and performance of cultured skin substitutes. Burns, 2001, 27: 523–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Sheng-de G. Management of full-thickness burns, in Zhi-yang, F et al., eds. Modern Treatment of Severe Burns, Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1992, pp. 64–79.Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    Tanner JC. The mesh skin graft. Plast Reconst Surg, 1964, 34: 287–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Thompkins RG and Burke JF. Alternative wound coverings, in Herndon, DN, ed. Total Burn Care, W.B. Saunders Company Ltd.: London, 1996, pp. 164–172.Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Pruitt BA. The evolutionary development of biologic dressings and skin substitutes. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1997, 18: S2–S5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Hansbrough J. Allograft (Homograft) Skin, in Wound Coverage with Biologic Dressings and Cultured Skin Substitutes, R.G. Landes Company: Austin, 1992, pp. 21–39.Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Mackie DP. The Euro skin bank: development and application of glycerol-preserved allografts. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1997, 18: S7–S12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Ben-Bassat H, et al. How long can cryopreserved skin be stored to maintain adequate graft performance? Burns, 2001, 27: 425–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Ramakrishnan KM and Jayaraman V. Management of partial-thickness burns by amniotic membranes: a cost-effective treatment in developing countries. Burns, 1997, 23: S33–S36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Sawhney CP. Amniotic membrane as a biological dressing in the management of burns. Burns, 1989, 15: 339–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Hansbrough JF. Human amnion, in Wound Coverage with Biologic Dressings and Cultured Skin Substitutes, R.G. Landes Company: Austin, 1992, pp. 10–12.Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Lin SD, et al. Amnion overlay meshed skin autograft. Burns, 1985, 11: 374–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Sullivan TP, et al. The pig as a model for human wound healing. Wound Repair Regen, 2001, 9: 66–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Hansbrough J. Xenograft (Heterograft) Skin, in Wound Coverage with Biologic Dressings and Cultured Skin Substitutes, R.G. Landes Company: Austin, 1992, pp. 13–20.Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Bach, FH et al. Uncertainty in xenotransplantation: individual benefit versus collective risk. Nat Med, 1998, 4: 141.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Kim B, Baez CE, and Atala A. Biomaterials for tissue engineering. World J Urol, 2000, 18: 2–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Marler JJ, et al. Transplantation of cells in matrices for tissue regeneration. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 1998, 33: 165–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Berthod F and Damour O. In vitro reconstructed skin models for wound coverage in deep burns. Br J Dermatol, 1997, 136: 809–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Gogolewski S and Pennings AJ. An artificial skin based on biodegradable mixtures of polylactides and polyurethanes for full-thickness skin wound covering. Makromol Chem, Rapid Commun, 1983, 4: 675–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Parenteau N, et al. Biological and physical factors influencing the successful engraftment of a cultured human skin substitute. Biotechnol Bioeng, 1996, 52: 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Sefton MV and Woodhouse KA. Tissue engineering. J Cutan MedSurg, 1998, 3: S1-18–S1-23.Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    Jorgensen PH, Bang C, and Andreassen TT. Mechanical properties of skin graft wounds. Br J Plast Surg, 1993, 46: 565–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Jonkman MF, et al. Evaporative water loss and epidermis regeneration in partial-thickness wounds dressed with a fluid-retaining versus a clot-inducing wound covering in guinea pigs. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg, 1989, 23: 29–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Greenwald SE and Berry, CL. Improving vascular grafts: the importance of mechanical and hemodynamic properties. J Pathol, 2000, 190: 292–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Peppas NA, et al. Physiochemical foundations and structural design of hydrogels in medicine and biology. Ann Rev Biomed Eng, 2000, 2: 9–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Chvapil M. Considerations on manufacturing principles of a synthetic burn dressing: a review. J Biomed Mater Res, 1982, 16: 245–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Chen G, Ushida T, and Tateishi T. Hybrid biomaterials for tissue engineering: a preparative method for PLA or PLGA-collagen hybrid sponges. Adv Mater, 2000, 12: 455–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Beumer GJ, Blitterswijk CA and Ponec M. Biocompatibility of a biodegradable matrix used as a skin substitute: an in vivo evaluation. J Biomed Mater Res, 1994, 28: 545–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Wald HL, et al. Cell seeding in porous transplantation devices. Biomaterials, 1993, 14: 270–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Ruszczak Z. Effect of collagen matrices on dermal wound healing. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 2003, 55: 1595–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. 162.
    Badylak SF. The extracellular matrix as a scaffold for tissue reconstruction. Cell Dev Biol, 2002, 13: 377–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Alper JC, et al. Moist wound healing under a vapor permeable membrane. J Am Acad Dermatol, 1983, 8: 347–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Alvarez OM, Mertz PM, and Eaglstein WH. The effect of occlusive dressings on collagen synthesis and re-epithelialization in superficial wounds. J Surg Res, 1983, 35: 142–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    Eldad A, Kadar ST, and Kushnir M. Immediate dressing of the burn wound – will it change its natural history? Burns, 1991, 17: 233–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    Helfman T, Ovington L, and Falanga V. Occlusive dressings and wound healing. Clin Dermatol, 1994, 12: 121–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Falanga V. Occlusive wound dressings. Arch Dermatol, 1988, 124: 872–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. 168.
    Queen D, et al. The preclinical evaluation of the water vapour transmission rate through burn wound dressings. Biomaterials, 1987, 8: 367–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    Berardesca E, et al. Effect of occlusive dressings on the stratum corneum water holding capacity. Am J Med Sci, 1992, 304: 25–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. 170.
    Neal DE, et al. The effects of an adherent polyurethane film and conventional absorbent dressing in patients with small partial thickness burns. Br J Clin Pract, 1981, 35: 254–257.Google Scholar
  171. 171.
    Poulsen TD, et al. Polyurethane film (Opsite*) vs. impregnated gauze (Jelonet*) in the treatment of outpatient burns: a prospective, randomized study. Burns, 1991, 17: 59–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. 172.
    Eldad A and Tuchman I. The use of Omiderm® as an interface for skin grafting. Burns, 1991, 17: 155–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    Staso MA, et al. Experience with Omiderm* – a new burn dressing. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1991, 12: 209–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. 174.
    Jonkman MF, et al. A clot-inducing wound covering with high vapour permeability: enhancing effects on epidermal wound healing in partial-thickness wounds in guinea pigs. Surgery, 1988, 104: 537–545.Google Scholar
  175. 175.
    Jonkman MF, Bruin P, and Pennings AJ. Poly(ether urethane) wound coverings with high vapour permeability compared with conventional tulle gras on split-skin donor sites. Burns, 1989, 15: 211–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. 176.
    Bruin P, et al. A new porous polyetherurethane wound covering. J Biomed Mater Res, 1990, 24: 217–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. 177.
    Landrum J and Jones, EB. A new dressing for burns: enclosure in a plasticized polyvinyl chloride sheet. Burns, 1976, 2: 86–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. 178.
    Davies JWL. Synthetic materials for covering burn wounds: progress towards perfection. Part I. Short term dressing materials. Burns, 1983, 10: 94–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  179. 179.
    Dressler DP, Barbee WK, and Sprenger R. The effect of Hydron burn wound dressing on burned rat and rabbit ear wound healing. J Trauma, 1980, 20: 1024–1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. 180.
    Brown AS. Hydron for burns. Plast Reconstr Surg, 1981, 67: 810–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  181. 181.
    Young SR, et al. Comparison of the effects of semi-occlusive polyurethane dressings and hydrocolloid dressings on dermal repair: 1. cellular changes. J Invest Dermatol, 1991, 97: 586–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. 182.
    Agren MS and Wijesinghe C. Occlusivity and effects of two occlusive dressings on normal human skin. Acta Derm Venereol, 1994, 74: 12–14.Google Scholar
  183. 183.
    Hansbrough J. Synthetic and biosynthetic wound coverings, in Wound Coverage with Biologic Dressings and Cultured Skin Substitutes, R.G. Landes Company: Austin, 1992, pp. 41–59.Google Scholar
  184. 184.
    Currie LJ, Sharpe JR, and Martin R. The use of fibrin glue in skin grafts and tissue-engineered skin replacements: a review. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2001, 108: 1713–1726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. 185.
    DeBlois C, Cote MF, and Doillon CJ. Heparin-fibroblast growth factor-fibrin complex: in vitro and in vivo applications to collagen-based materials. Biomaterials, 1993, 15: 665–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  186. 186.
    Cote MF and Doillon CJ. In vitro contraction rate of collagen in sponge-shape matrices. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed, 1992, 3: 301–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. 187.
    Ramshaw JAM, Werkmeister JA, and Glattauer V. Collagen-based biomaterials. Biotechnol Genetic Eng Rev, 1995, 13: 335–382.Google Scholar
  188. 188.
    Doillon CJ, et al.Porosity and biological properties of polyethylene glycol-conjugated collagen materials. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed, 1994, 6: 715–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  189. 189.
    Rheinwald JG and Green H. Serial cultivation of strains of human epidermal keratinocytes: the formation of keratinizing colonies from single cells. Cell, 1975, 6: 331–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  190. 190.
    Carsin H, et al. Cultured epithelial autografts in extensive burn coverage of severely traumatized patients: a five year single-center experience with 30 patients. Burns, 2000, 26: 379–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. 191.
    Hafemann B, et al. Treatment of skin defects using suspensions of in vitro cultured keratinocytes. Burns, 1994, 160: 168–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. 192.
    Blight A, et al. The treatment of donor sites with cultured epithelial grafts. Br J Plast Surg, 1991, 44: 12–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  193. 193.
    Gielen V, et al. Progressive replacement of human cultured epithelial autograts by recipient cells as evidenced by HLA class I antigens expression. Dermatologica, 1987, 175: 166–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. 194.
    Lam PK, et al. Development and evaluation of a new composite Laserskin graft. J Trauma, 1999, 47: 918–922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. 195.
    Lees VC, Fan, TD, and West, DC. Angiogenesis in a delayed revascularization model is accelerated by angiogenic oligosaccharides of hyaluronan. Lab Invest, 1995, 73: 259–266.Google Scholar
  196. 196.
    Lobmann R, et al. Autologous human keratinocytes cultured on membranes composed of benzyl ester of hyaluronic acid for grafting in nonhealing diabetic foot lesions: a pilot study. J Diabetes Complicat, 2003, 17: 199–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  197. 197.
    Naughton G, Mansbridge, J, and Gentzkow, G. A metabolically active human dermal replacement for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Artif Organs, 1997, 21: 1203–1210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  198. 198.
    Naughton GK. Skin and epithelia, in Lanza, RP, Langer, R, and Chick, WL, eds. Principles of Tissue Engineering, R.G. Landes Company: Austin, 1997, pp. 769–782.Google Scholar
  199. 199.
    Gentzkow G, et al. Use of Dermagraft, a cultured human dermis, to treat diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care, 1996, 19: 350–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  200. 200.
    Hansbrough JF, Dore C, and Hansbrough WB. Clinical trials of a living dermal tissue replacement beneath meshed, split-thickness skin grafts on excised burn wounds. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1992, 13: 519–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  201. 201.
    Hansbrough JF, et al. Evaluation of a biodegradable matrix containing cultured human fibroblasts as a dermal replacement beneath meshed split-thickness skin grafts. Surgery, 1992, 111: 438–446.Google Scholar
  202. 202.
    Kearney JN. Clinical evaluation of skin substitutes. Burns, 2001, 27: 545–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  203. 203.
    Wainwright D. Use of an acellular allograft dermal matrix (AlloDerm) in the management of full-thickness burns. Burns, 1995, 21: 243–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  204. 204.
    Bannasch H, et al. Skin tissue engineering. Clin Plast Surg, 2003, 30: 573–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  205. 205.
    Wainwright D, et al. Clinical evaluation of an acellular allograft dermal matrix in full-thickness burns. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1996, 17: 124–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  206. 206.
    Yannas IV, Burke JF, and Orgill DP. Wound tissue can utilize a polymeric template to synthesize a functional extension of skin. Science, 1982, 215: 174–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  207. 207.
    Burke JF, et al. Successful use of a physiologically acceptable artificial skin in the treatment of extensive burn injury. Ann Surg, 1981, 194: 413–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  208. 208.
    Ellis DL and Yannas IV. Recent advances in tissue synthesis in vivo by use of collagen-glycosaminoglycan copolymers. Biomaterials, 1996, 17: 291–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  209. 209.
    Sheridan RL, et al. Artificial skin in massive burns – results to ten years. Eur J Plast Surg, 1994, 17: 91–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  210. 210.
    Cooper ML and Hansbrough JF. Use of a composite skin graft composed of cultured human keratinocytes and fibroblasts and a collagen-GAG matrix to cover full-thickness wounds on athymic mice. Surgery, 1991, 109: 198–207.Google Scholar
  211. 211.
    Boyce ST and Hansbrough JF. Biologic attachment, growth and differentiation of cultured human keratinocytes on a graftable collagen and chondroitin-6-sulfate substrate. Surgery, 1988, 103: 421–431.Google Scholar
  212. 212.
    Falanga V, et al. Rapid healing of venous ulcers and lack of clinical rejection with an allogenic cultured human skin equivalent. Arch Dermatol, 1998, 134: 293–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  213. 213.
    Guerret S, et al. Long-term remodeling of a bilayered living human skin equivalent (Apligraft®) grafted onto nude mice: immunolocalization of human cells and characterization of extracellular matrix. Wound Repair Regen, 2003. 11: 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  214. 214.
    Klein RL, Rothman BF, and Marshall R. Biobrane – a useful adjunct in the therapy of out-patient burns. J Pediatr Surg, 1984, 19: 846–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  215. 215.
    Purdue GF, et al. Biosynthetic skin substitute versus frozen human cadaver allograft for temporary coverage of excised burn wounds. J Trauma, 1987, 27: 155–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  216. 216.
    Purdue GF. Dermagraft-TC pivotal efficacy and safety study. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1997, 18: S13–S14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  217. 217.
    Hansbrough J. Dermagraft-TC for partial-thickness burns: A clinical evaluation. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1997, 18: S25–S28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  218. 218.
    Wang HJ, et al. Acceleration of skin graft healing by growth factors. Burns, 1996, 22: 10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  219. 219.
    Ono I, et al. Studies on cytokines related to wound healing in donor site wound fluid. J Dermatol Sci, 1995, 10: 241–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  220. 220.
    Smith PD, et al. Efficacy of growth factors in the accelerated closure of interstices in explanted meshed human skin grafts. J Burn Care Rehabil, 2000, 21: 5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  221. 221.
    Hansbrough JF. Biologic mediators in wound healing, in Wound Coverage with Biologic Dressings and Cultured Skin Substitutes, R.G. Landes Company: Austin, 1992, pp. 116–147.Google Scholar
  222. 222.
    Wenczak BA, Lynch JB, and Nanney LB. Epidermal growth factor receptor distribution in burn wounds. Implications for growth factor-mediated repair. J Clin Invest, 1992, 90: 2392–2401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  223. 223.
    Kiyohara Y, et al. Improvements in wound healing by epidermal growth factor (EGF) ointment. II. Effect of protease inhibitor, nafamostat, on stabilization and efficacy of EGF in burn. J Pharmacobiodynamics, 1991, 14: 47–52.Google Scholar
  224. 224.
    Chvapil M, Gaines JA, and Gilman T. Lanolin and epidermal growth factor in healing of partial-thickness pig wounds. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1988, 9: 279–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  225. 225.
    Arturson G. Epidermal growth factor in the healing of corneal wounds, epidermal wounds and partial-thickness scalds. A controlled animal study. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg, 1984, 18: 33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  226. 226.
    Gibran NS, et al. Basic fibroblast growth factor in the early human burn wound. J Surg Res, 1994, 56: 226–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  227. 227.
    Fu X, et al. Recombinant bovine basic fibroblast growth factor accelerates wound healing in patients with burns, donor sites and chronic dermal ulcers. Chin Med J, 2000, 113: 367–371.Google Scholar
  228. 228.
    Fu X, et al. Randomised placebo-controlled trial of use of topical recombinant bovine basic fibroblast growth factor for second-degree burns. Lancet, 1998, 352: 1661–1664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  229. 229.
    Hakvoort T, et al. Transforming growth factor-beta(1), -beta(2), -beta(3), basic fibroblast growth factor and vascular endothelial growth factor expression in keratinocytes of burn scars. Eur Cytokine Netw, 2000, 11: 233–239.Google Scholar
  230. 230.
    Danilenko DM, et al. Growth factors in porcine full and partial thickness burn repair. Differing targets and effects of keratinocyte growth factor, platelet-derived growth factor-BB, epidermal growth factor, and neu differentiation factor. Am J Pathol, 1995, 147: 1261–1277.Google Scholar
  231. 231.
    Polo M, et al. Cytokine production in patients with hypertrophic burn scars. J Burn Care Rehabil, 1997, 18: 477–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  232. 232.
    Smith P, et al. TGF-β2 activates proliferative scar fibroblasts. J Surg Res, 1999, 82: 319–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  233. 233.
    Beer HD, et al. Expression and function of keratinocyte growth factor and activin in skin morphogenesis and cutaneous wound repair. J Invest Dermatol Symp, 2000, 5: 34–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  234. 234.
    Edmondson SR, et al. Epidermal homeostasis: the role of the growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor systems. Endocr Rev, 2003, 24: 737–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  235. 235.
    Wolf SE, et al. Insulin-like growth factor-1/insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 alters lymphocyte responsiveness following severe burn. J Surg es, 2004, 117: 255–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  236. 236.
    Swope VB, Supp AP, and Boyce ST. Regulation of cutaneous pigmentation by titration of human melanocytes in cultured skin substitutes grafted to athymic mice. Wound Repair Regen, 2002, 10: 378–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag US 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada K7L 3N6
  2. 2.Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry, Institute of Biomaterials and Biomedical EngineeringSunnybrook and Women’s College Health Sciences Centre, University of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations