A study to evaluate primary dressings for the application of cultured keratinocytes

Despite the recent improvements in cell culture and dermal regeneration methods, tissue engineering of skin has yet to receive widespread acceptance in the management of burn injuries. The reasons for this are complex and include not only the inherent costs of (particularly) setting up and running such a system but also the continuing difficulties in achieving successful engraftment of the neoepidermis. The latter has previously been addressed in a number of ways, including improving the recipient bed and using pre-confluent delivery systems to allow earlier application of cells to that wound bed. One area that has received little attention is that of the optimal wound dressing to use with this technology; the cells are very poorly attached at early time points, and, in this context, the traditional dressing of paraffin gauze has never been formally assessed in comparison with newer materials. Using a porcine acute wound chamber model, we performed a prospective randomised trial to assess four different wound dressings with reference to the amount of epidermal cover gained and the histological quality of the regenerated skin after 3 weeks. Out of the four materials tested, polyurethane foam (Allevyn) was superior histologically (although equal in take rate with paraffin gauze), whilst polythene sheet (Opsite) and silicone sheet were substantially inferior. We conclude that the traditional dressing used with this technology should be compared with polyurethane foam in a clinical trial. In the future, novel dressings should be formally tested against traditional methods before being adopted.