Cited by 15Wound Healing and TreatmentsBurn Injury Management and OutcomesTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine

Evaluation of healing outcomes combining a novel polymer formulation with autologous skin cell suspension to treat deep partial and full thickness wounds in a porcine model: a pilot study

Open access
Carney, Bonnie C., Oliver, Mary A., Erdi, Metecan, Kirkpatrick, Liam D., Tranchina, Stephen P., Rozyyev, Selim, Keyloun, John W., Saruwatari, Michele S. +5 more·2022·Burns

Abstract

Autologous skin cell suspensions (ASCS) can treat burns of varying depths with the advantage of reduced donor site wound burden. The current standard primary dressing for ASCS is a nonabsorbant, non-adherent, perforated film (control) which has limited conformability over heterogeneous wound beds and allows for run-off of the ASCS. To address these concerns, a novel spray-on polymer formulation was tested as a potential primary dressing in porcine deep partial thickness (DPT) and full thickness (FT) wounds. It was hypothesized that the polymer would perform as well as control dressing when evaluating wound healing and scarring. DPT or FT wounds were treated with either a spray-on poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) and poly(lactide-co-caprolactone) (PLCL) formulation or control ASCS dressings. Throughout the experimental time course (to day 50), we found no significant differences between polymer and control wounds in % re-epithelialization, graft-loss, epidermal or dermal thickness, or % dermal cellularity in either model. Pigmentation, erythema, elasticity, and trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL), were not significantly altered between the treatment groups, but differences between healing wounds/scars and un-injured skin were observed. No cytotoxic effect was observed in ASCS incubated with the PLGA and PLCL polymers. These data suggest that the novel spray-on polymer is a viable option as a primary dressing, with improved ease of application and conformation to irregular wounds. Polymer formulation and application technique should be a subject of future research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.burns.2022.01.012

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Fibers fabricated via solution blow spinning exhibit minimal solvent residues, have diameters ranging from the nanoscale to the microscale, and PLCL materials can be fabricated into various scaffolds via solution blow spinning for diverse biomedical fields.

    “The results showed that fibers fabricated via the SBS method exhibit minimal solvent residues, the fiber scaffolds had diameters ranging from the nanoscale to the microscale, and PLCL materials could be fabricated into various scaffolds via the SBS method for applications in diverse biomedical fields [84–87].”

    From Application of PLCL as a biodegradable polymer in biomedical engineering (2026) · cites this paper as [87]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carney, B. C., Oliver, M. A., Erdi, M., Kirkpatrick, L. D., Tranchina, S. P., Rozyyev, S., Keyloun, J. W., Saruwatari, M. S., Daristotle, J. L., Moffatt, L. T., Kofinas, P., Sandler, A. D., & Shupp, J. W.
Affiliations
  • Georgetown University (US)
  • MedStar Health Research Institute (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
  • Children's National (US)
  • MedStar Washington Hospital Center (US)
  • Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research At MIT (US)
Corresponding author
Shupp, Jeffrey W.
Venue
Burns
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-12
Volume
48
Issue
8
Pages
1950-1965
ISSN
0305-4179 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4207083894
Cited by
15
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4
FWCI
1.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Burns (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM141132)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01EB019963)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Wound Healing and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Burn Injury Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Keywords
autologous skin cell suspension, burn wound healing, PLGA, PLCL, full-thickness wounds, re-epithelialization, scar formation, porcine model, transepidermal water loss
MeSH terms
Animals, Burns, Cicatrix, Pilot Projects, Polymers, Swine, Wound Healing, Skin Transplantation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review