INTRODUCTION:Adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs) hold great promise for regenerative medicine applications due to their ability to promote the healing process through in situ differentiation and secretion of paracrine factor. The aim of this paper is to present a clinical adjunct for chronic skin wound therapy based on ASCs added to platelet-rich plasma (PRP), to obtain an enhanced PRP (e-PRP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 18 months, 24 control-group patients with 31 chronic skin ulcers were treated with standard wound care, while 16 experimental-group patients with 21 chronic skin ulcers were treated with standard wound care and 1 e-PRP injection. The patients were randomly assigned to the control or experimental group. Outpatients had weekly follow-up visits where they were subjected to standard treatment and the wound healing process was assessed. RESULTS: At the end of the study, the control and experimental groups had similar healing rates but wound closure rates were significantly different (P = 0.0257): 0.0890 cm(2) x day and 0.2287 cm(2) x day respectively, resulting in a faster recovery for the group treated with e-PRP. No side effects were reported. CONCLUSION: In the authors' experience, e-PRP significantly enhanced wound closure rates when compared to standard wound care, without causing any serious complications. This finding highlights e-PRP as a valuable resource for chronic wound treatment.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs) hold great promise for regenerative medicine applications due to their ability to promote the healing process through in situ differentiation and secretion of paracrine factor. The aim of this paper is to present a clinical adjunct for chronic skin wound therapy based on ASCs added to platelet-rich plasma (PRP), to obtain an enhanced PRP (e-PRP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 18 months, 24 control-group patients with 31 chronic skin ulcers were treated with standard wound care, while 16 experimental-group patients with 21 chronic skin ulcers were treated with standard wound care and 1 e-PRP injection. The patients were randomly assigned to the control or experimental group. Outpatients had weekly follow-up visits where they were subjected to standard treatment and the wound healing process was assessed. RESULTS: At the end of the study, the control and experimental groups had similar healing rates but wound closure rates were significantly different (P = 0.0257): 0.0890 cm(2) x day and 0.2287 cm(2) x day respectively, resulting in a faster recovery for the group treated with e-PRP. No side effects were reported. CONCLUSION: In the authors' experience, e-PRP significantly enhanced wound closure rates when compared to standard wound care, without causing any serious complications. This finding highlights e-PRP as a valuable resource for chronic wound treatment.