Cited by 78Wound Healing and TreatmentsTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineBurn Injury Management and Outcomes

Overexpression of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Accelerates Early Vascularization and Improves Healing of Genetically Modified Cultured Skin Substitutes

Supp, Dorothy M., Boyce, Steven T.·2002·The Journal of Burn Care & Rehabilitation

Abstract

Cultured skin substitutes (CSS) lack a vascular plexus, leading to slower vascularization after grafting than split-thickness skin autograft. CSS containing keratinocytes genetically modified to overexpress vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) were previously shown to exhibit enhanced vascularization up to 2 weeks after grafting to athymic mice. The present study examines whether enhanced vascularization compared with controls persists after stable engraftment is achieved and analyzes VEGF expression, wound contraction, and engraftment. Control and VEGF-modified (VEGF+) CSS were grafted onto full-thickness wounds in athymic mice. VEGF expression was detected in VEGF+ CSS 14 weeks after grafting. Graft contraction was significantly lower in VEGF+ CSS compared with controls, suggesting more stable engraftment and better tissue development. Positive HLA-ABC staining, indicating persistence of human cells, was seen in 86.7% (13/15) of grafted VEGF+ CSS, compared with 58.3% (7/12) of controls. Differences in dermal vascularization between control and VEGF+ grafts were significant 1 week after surgery, but not at later times. However, the distribution of vessels was different, with more vessels in the upper dermis of VEGF+ grafts. These results suggest that VEGF overexpression in genetically modified CSS acts to accelerate early graft vascularization and can contribute to improved healing of full-thickness skin wounds.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00004630-200201000-00004

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Supp, D. M., & Boyce, S. T.
Affiliations
Shriners Hospitals for Children - Cincinnati (US)
Corresponding author
Supp, Dorothy M.
Venue
The Journal of Burn Care & Rehabilitation
Published
2002-01-01
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
10-20
ISSN
  • 0273-8481 (ISSN-L)
  • 1534-5939
OpenAlex
W2094815961
Cited by
78
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
8.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Burn Care & Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Wound Healing and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Burn Injury Management and Outcomes
Keywords
vascular endothelial growth factor, cultured skin substitutes, graft vascularization, wound healing, full-thickness wounds, engraftment, wound contraction, athymic mice, burn wound reconstruction
MeSH terms
Adult, Animals, Cadaver, Genetic Techniques, Humans, Lymphokines, Male, Mice, Nude, Random Allocation, RNA, Messenger, Skin, Time Factors, Wound Healing, HLA-A Antigens, HLA-B Antigens, HLA-C Antigens, Keratinocytes, Up-Regulation, Skin Transplantation, Endothelial Growth Factors, Neovascularization, Physiologic, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A, Mice

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