Margit Kempf1, Roy M Kimble, Leila Cuttle. 1. Centre for Children's Burns and Trauma Research, The University of Queensland, Department of Paediatrics and Child Health and Queensland Children's Medical Research Institute, Level 4, Foundation Building, Royal Children's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD 4029, Australia. kempfm@uq.edu.au
Abstract
UNLABELLED: We have developed a method to test the cytotoxicity of wound dressings, ointments, creams and gels used in our Burn Centre, by placing them on a permeable Nunc™ Polycarbonate cell culture insert, incubated with a monolayer of cells (HaCaTs and primary human keratinocytes). METHODS: We performed two different methods to determine the relative toxicity to cells. (1) Photo visualisation: The dressings or compounds were positioned on the insert's membrane which was placed onto the monolayer tissue culture plate. After 24 h the surviving adherent cells were stained with Toluidine Blue and photos of the plates were taken. The acellular area of non-adherent dead cells which had been washed off with buffer was measured as a percentage of the total area of the plate. (2) Cell count of surviving cells: After 24 h incubation with the test material, the remaining cells were detached with trypsin, spun down and counted in a Haemocytometer with Trypan Blue, which differentiates between live and dead cells. RESULTS: Seventeen products were tested. The least cytotoxic products were Melolite™, White soft Paraffin™ and Chlorsig1% Ointment. Some cytotoxicity was shown with Jelonet™, Mepitel(®), PolyMem(®), DuoDerm(®) and Xeroform™. The most cytotoxic products included those which contained silver or Chlorhexidine and Paraffin Cream™ a moisturizer which contains the preservative Chlorocresol. CONCLUSION: This in vitro cell culture insert method allows testing of agents without direct cell contact. It is easy and quick to perform, and should help the clinician to determine the relative cytotoxicity of various dressings and the optimal dressing for each individual wound.
UNLABELLED: We have developed a method to test the cytotoxicity of wound dressings, ointments, creams and gels used in our Burn Centre, by placing them on a permeable Nunc™ Polycarbonate cell culture insert, incubated with a monolayer of cells (HaCaTs and primary human keratinocytes). METHODS: We performed two different methods to determine the relative toxicity to cells. (1) Photo visualisation: The dressings or compounds were positioned on the insert's membrane which was placed onto the monolayer tissue culture plate. After 24 h the surviving adherent cells were stained with Toluidine Blue and photos of the plates were taken. The acellular area of non-adherent dead cells which had been washed off with buffer was measured as a percentage of the total area of the plate. (2) Cell count of surviving cells: After 24 h incubation with the test material, the remaining cells were detached with trypsin, spun down and counted in a Haemocytometer with Trypan Blue, which differentiates between live and dead cells. RESULTS: Seventeen products were tested. The least cytotoxic products were Melolite™, White soft Paraffin™ and Chlorsig1% Ointment. Some cytotoxicity was shown with Jelonet™, Mepitel(®), PolyMem(®), DuoDerm(®) and Xeroform™. The most cytotoxic products included those which contained silver or Chlorhexidine and Paraffin Cream™ a moisturizer which contains the preservative Chlorocresol. CONCLUSION: This in vitro cell culture insert method allows testing of agents without direct cell contact. It is easy and quick to perform, and should help the clinician to determine the relative cytotoxicity of various dressings and the optimal dressing for each individual wound.
Authors: Bonnie C Carney; Rachel T Ortiz; Rachael M Bullock; Nicholas J Prindeze; Lauren T Moffatt; Martin C Robson; Jeffrey W Shupp Journal: Eplasty Date: 2014-12-10
Authors: Chiara Rigo; Letizia Ferroni; Ilaria Tocco; Marco Roman; Ivan Munivrana; Chiara Gardin; Warren R L Cairns; Vincenzo Vindigni; Bruno Azzena; Carlo Barbante; Barbara Zavan Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Julia Hurler; Karen K Sørensen; Adyary Fallarero; Pia Vuorela; Nataša Škalko-Basnet Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2013-11-28 Impact factor: 3.411