Archives of Craniofacial Surgery (대한두개안면성형외과학회지)

Korean Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (대한두개안면성형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative evaluation of hyaluronic acid-based dressing versus hydrocolloid dressing in rat dermal wound healing

  • Hye Mi Lee (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Wonkwang University Hospital) ;
  • Eun Jung Jang (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Wonkwang University Hospital) ;
  • Ki Hun Choi (Department of Dermatology, Wonkwang University Hospital) ;
  • Young Cheon Na (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Wonkwang University Hospital)
  • Received : 2024.07.04
  • Accepted : 2024.10.17
  • Published : 2024.10.20
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Wound healing is a complex process influenced by a variety of environmental factors. Dressing materials play a critical role in creating barriers against contaminants, maintaining optimal moisture levels, and absorbing wound exudate. Therefore, selecting materials tailored to wound characteristics is crucial for enhancing outcomes. Hyaluronic acid (HA) is a natural biocompatible polymer that supports healing by regulating inflammation and promoting tissue repair. This study compared HA- and hydrocolloid-based hydrogels in a rat model to optimize wound care strategies. Methods: Full-thickness dermal wounds (diameter, 8 mm) were created on the dorsal skin of 12 Sprague-Dawley rats under sevoflurane anesthesia. The wounds were treated with HA/silver sulfadiazine gel (group A), hydrocolloid gel (group B), or left untreated (control), all covered with a transparent dressing. Biopsy specimens on days 3, 7, and 21 were used to assess histological parameters: inflammatory cell infiltration, fibroblast infiltration, collagen deposition, neovascularization, and epithelial thickness, using a semi-quantitative scoring system. Histological analyses were conducted blindly, and statistical analyses were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (p< 0.05). Results: On day 3, group A showed significantly higher inflammatory cell infiltration and collagen deposition than other groups, indicating extracellular matrix formation. By day 7, angiogenesis was highest in group A, followed by group B and controls. By day 21, all wounds had completely healed. Epithelial layer thickness, reflecting inflammation and fibroblast maturity, was significantly higher in group A. Conclusion: This study compared HA-based hydrogel and hydrocolloid-based dressings through histological analyses to elucidate wound healing mechanics. HA-based hydrogel dressings significantly enhanced wound recovery. However, generalizing these outcomes requires future studies to expand the range of effective wound treatment materials. These findings underscore the potential of HA-based dressings to enhance clinical outcomes in wound management, suggesting avenues for improving therapeutic strategies.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This study was supported by Wonkwang University in 2024.

References

  1. Diegelmann RF, Evans MC. Wound healing: an overview of acute, fibrotic and delayed healing. Front Biosci 2004;9:283-9. 
  2. Boateng J, Catanzano O. Advanced therapeutic dressings for effective wound healing: a review. J Pharm Sci 2015;104:3653-80. 
  3. Frenkel JS. The role of hyaluronan in wound healing. Int Wound J 2014;11:159-63. 
  4. Vidinsky B, Gal P, Toporcer T, Longauer F, Lenhardt L, Bobrov N, et al. Histological study of the first seven days of skin wound healing in rats. Acta Vet Brno 2006;75:197-202. 
  5. Gupta A, Kumar P. Assessment of the histological state of the healing wound. Plast Aesthet Res 2015;2:239-42. 
  6. Qian LW, Fourcaudot AB, Yamane K, You T, Chan RK, Leung KP. Exacerbated and prolonged inflammation impairs wound healing and increases scarring. Wound Repair Regen 2016;24:26-34. 
  7. Hong YK, Chang YH, Lin YC, Chen B, Guevara BEK, Hsu CK. Inflammation in wound healing and pathological scarring. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) 2023;12:288-300. 
  8. Winter GD. Formation of the scab and the rate of epithelization of superficial wounds in the skin of the young domestic pig. Nature 1962;193:293-4. 
  9. Weller CD, Team V, Sussman G. First-line interactive wound dressing update: a comprehensive review of the evidence. Front Pharmacol 2020;11:155. 
  10. Duoderm Hydroactive Gel. Product information [Internet]. Convatec; c2024 [cited 2024 Oct 21]. Available from: https://www.convatec.com/en-nz/ 
  11. Kim YS, Park JJ, Yi HS, Park JH, Kim HI. Is the retroauricular region a suitable donor site for full-thickness skin grafting in the era of mask wearing? Arch Craniofac Surg. 2023;24:66-72. 
  12. Reed RK, Lilja K, Laurent TC. Hyaluronan in the rat with special reference to the skin. Acta Physiol Scand 1988;134:405-11. 
  13. Graca MFP, Miguel SP, Cabral CSD, Correia IJ. Hyaluronic acid-based wound dressings: a review. Carbohydr Polym 2020;241:116364. 
  14. Ki SH, Park TJ. Prevention and treatment of microstomia. Arch Craniofac Surg 2024;25:105-15. 
  15. Hong L, Shen M, Fang J, Wang Y, Bao Z, Bu S, et al. Hyaluronic acid (HA)-based hydrogels for full-thickness wound repairing and skin regeneration. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2018;29:150. 
  16. Lazarus GS, Cooper DM, Knighton DR, Margolis DJ, Pecoraro RE, Rodeheaver G, et al. Definitions and guidelines for assessment of wounds and evaluation of healing. Arch Dermatol 1994;130:489-93. 
  17. Lemo N, Marignac G, Reyes E, Lilin T, Crosaz O, Ehrenfest D. Cutaneous reepithelialization and wound contraction after skin biopsies in rabbits: a mathematical model for healing and remodelling index. Vet Arh 2010;80:637-52. 
  18. Taylor KR, Trowbridge JM, Rudisill JA, Termeer CC, Simon JC, Gallo RL. Hyaluronan fragments stimulate endothelial recognition of injury through TLR4. J Biol Chem 2004;279:17079-84. 
  19. West DC, Hampson IN, Arnold F, Kumar S. Angiogenesis induced by degradation products of hyaluronic acid. Science 1985;228:1324-6. 
  20. Kim HI, Kwak CY, Kim HY, Yi HS, Park EJ, Kim JH, et al. Correlation between dermal thickness and scar formation in female patients after thyroidectomy. Arch Craniofac Surg 2018;19:120-6.