Literature DB >> 10894235

Standardized burn model using a multiparametric histologic analysis of burn depth.

A J Singer1, L Berruti, H C Thode, S A McClain.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Burn depth and extent determine prognosis and therapy. The current classification into first-, second-, and third-degree burns is crude, making comparisons between studies difficult. The authors standardized a reproducible burn model and a precise histopathologic method for describing burn depth in swine.
METHODS: This was a prospective, cross-sectional interventional animal study. Eighteen paired sets of burns were inflicted on the clipped flank skin of two anesthetized domestic pigs with a 2.5 cm by 2.5 cm by 7.5 cm aluminum bar preheated in water to 50 degrees C, 60 degrees C, 70 degrees C, 80 degrees C, 90 degrees C, degrees C or 100 degrees C. The bar was applied for 10, 20, or 30 seconds. Full-thickness skin biopsies were obtained 30 minutes after injury for blinded histopathologic evaluation using hematoxylin and eosin staining. Two dermatopathologists made two sets of measurements and were masked to each other's evaluations. The depth of injury was measured with an ocular microtome for each of five dermal parameters: collagen discoloration, intercollagen basophilic material, endothelial cell necrosis, epithelial cell necrosis, and mesenchymal cell necrosis. The correlation between burn depths of the paired sets of experiments was calculated to assess the reliability of the model. Inter- and intraobserver correlations were calculated to assess the reliability of the scale. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to assess the relation between temperature and exposure times on burn depth.
RESULTS: Depth of injury for all five dermal elements was related to temperature and exposure times (ANOVA, p < 0.001 for each). The depth of injury in the paired sets of burns was highly consistent (Pearson correlation, range = 0.88-0.95). Inter- and intraobserver correlations were excellent for all measured elements (range = 0.91-0.97 and 0.95-0.99, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The authors describe a simple and reproducible animal burn model and histopathologic scale for measuring burn depth that they believe will facilitate standardization and comparison within future burn studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10894235     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb01881.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  19 in total

Review 1.  Comparing the reported burn conditions for different severity burns in porcine models: a systematic review.

Authors:  Christine J Andrews; Leila Cuttle
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2017-07-23       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Topically applied metal chelator reduces thermal injury progression in a rat model of brass comb burn.

Authors:  Cheng Z Wang; Amina El Ayadi; Juhi Goswamy; Celeste C Finnerty; Randy Mifflin; Linda Sousse; Perenlei Enkhbaatar; John Papaconstantinou; David N Herndon; Naseem H Ansari
Journal:  Burns       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 2.744

3.  Immediate tangential excision accelerates wound closure but does not reduce scarring of mid-dermal porcine burns.

Authors:  L K Macri; A J Singer; S A McClain; L Crawford; A Prasad; J Kohn; R A F Clark
Journal:  Ann Burns Fire Disasters       Date:  2016-03-31

4.  Development of a long-term ovine model of cutaneous burn and smoke inhalation injury and the effects of early excision and skin autografting.

Authors:  Yusuke Yamamoto; Perenlei Enkhbaatar; Hiroyuki Sakurai; Sebastian Rehberg; Sven Asmussen; Hiroshi Ito; Linda E Sousse; Robert A Cox; Donald J Deyo; Lillian D Traber; Maret G Traber; David N Herndon; Daniel L Traber
Journal:  Burns       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 2.744

5.  Validation of a vertical progression porcine burn model.

Authors:  Adam J Singer; Douglas Hirth; Steve A McClain; Laurie Crawford; Fubao Lin; Richard A F Clark
Journal:  J Burn Care Res       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.845

6.  Morphological parameters for assessment of burn severity in an acute burn injury rat model.

Authors:  David K Meyerholz; Travis L Piester; Julio C Sokolich; Gideon K D Zamba; Timothy D Light
Journal:  Int J Exp Pathol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 1.925

7.  A new model for studying deep partial-thickness burns in rats.

Authors:  Hui-Fang Guo; Razana M Ali; Roslida A Hamid; Asma A Zaini; Huzwah Khaza'ai
Journal:  Int J Burns Trauma       Date:  2017-10-25

8.  In vivo antibacterial activity of vertilmicin, a new aminoglycoside antibiotic.

Authors:  Xue-Fu You; Cong-Ran Li; Xin-Yi Yang; Min Yuan; Wei-Xin Zhang; Ren-Hui Lou; Yue-Ming Wang; Guo-Qing Li; Hui-Zhen Chen; Dan-Qing Song; Cheng-Hang Sun; Shan Cen; Li-Yan Yu; Li-Xun Zhao; Jian-Dong Jiang
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2009-07-27       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  A porcine model of full-thickness burn, excision and skin autografting.

Authors:  Ludwik K Branski; Rainer Mittermayr; David N Herndon; William B Norbury; Oscar E Masters; Martina Hofmann; Daniel L Traber; Heinz Redl; Marc G Jeschke
Journal:  Burns       Date:  2008-07-10       Impact factor: 2.744

Review 10.  Thermal injury of skin and subcutaneous tissues: A review of experimental approaches and numerical models.

Authors:  Hanglin Ye; Suvranu De
Journal:  Burns       Date:  2016-12-05       Impact factor: 2.744

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.