Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Group Design02:01

Group Design

The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between the two are due to...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Supporting the Implementation and Addressing the Challenges of the EU HTA Regulation.

Journal of market access & health policy·2026
Same author

The 4th Educational Course of the European Burns Association (EBA).

European burn journal·2026
Same author

Revue medicale suisse·2026
Same author

Ventricle width and cerebrospinal fluid diversion rate after open fetal spina bifida repair - a four year follow-up.

Fetal diagnosis and therapy·2026
Same author

Radial constraint of plastically compressed human dermo-epidermal skin substitutes mitigates<i>in vitro</i>contraction and enhances structural maturity.

Biofabrication·2026
Same author

Safety and efficacy of bio-engineered, autologous dermo-epidermal skin grafts in reconstructive surgery: 1-year results of a prospective, randomized, intra-patient controlled, multicenter phase II clinical trial.

Journal of tissue engineering·2026
Same journal

Development of the pediatric patient scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) for burn scars: A qualitative study.

Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries·2026
Same journal

Aloe vera barbadensis extract regenerator with metabolic regulatory functions promotes skin regeneration and reduces fibrosis deposition in diabetic burn model pigs.

Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries·2026
Same journal

Shock wave therapy versus conventional physical therapy for partial-thickness forearm burn scars: A randomized controlled trial.

Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries·2026
Same journal

Hyperpyrexia in major burn injury: describing the epidemiology and evaluating the effectiveness of an intravascular temperature management device.

Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries·2026
Same journal

Development and validation of a nomogram model for mortality risk in burn patients: Triglyceride-glucose index as an independent novel prognostic marker.

Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries·2026
Same journal

Self-management interventions for burn survivors: A literature review among patients with burns and other comparable chronic conditions.

Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 28, 2026

Tactile Vibrating Toolkit and Driving Simulation Platform for Driving-Related Research
07:15

Tactile Vibrating Toolkit and Driving Simulation Platform for Driving-Related Research

Published on: December 18, 2020

Matriderm versus Integra: a comparative experimental study.

Joerg Schneider1, Thomas Biedermann, Daniel Widmer

  • 1Paediatric Burn Centre, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University Children's Hospital, Steinwiesstrasse 75, Zürich, Switzerland.

Burns : Journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries
|October 28, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study compared Integra Artificial Skin and Matriderm in a rat model. Both skin substitutes demonstrated identical engraftment rates and vascularization, showing no significant differences.

More Related Videos

Inchworming: A Novel Motor Stereotypy in the BTBR T+ Itpr3tf/J Mouse Model of Autism
08:03

Inchworming: A Novel Motor Stereotypy in the BTBR T+ Itpr3tf/J Mouse Model of Autism

Published on: July 5, 2014

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 28, 2026

Tactile Vibrating Toolkit and Driving Simulation Platform for Driving-Related Research
07:15

Tactile Vibrating Toolkit and Driving Simulation Platform for Driving-Related Research

Published on: December 18, 2020

Inchworming: A Novel Motor Stereotypy in the BTBR T+ Itpr3tf/J Mouse Model of Autism
08:03

Inchworming: A Novel Motor Stereotypy in the BTBR T+ Itpr3tf/J Mouse Model of Autism

Published on: July 5, 2014

Area of Science:

  • Regenerative Medicine
  • Tissue Engineering
  • Dermatology

Background:

  • Integra Artificial Skin and Matriderm are widely used dermal substitutes for skin regeneration.
  • Comparing their efficacy in a preclinical model is crucial for clinical decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the engraftment rates and vascularization of Integra Artificial Skin and Matriderm.
  • To evaluate their performance in a standardized rat model.

Main Methods:

  • A two-step procedure involving matrix implantation followed by epidermal grafting was employed.
  • Neonatal rat epidermis was used for grafting to assess rapid and complete take.
  • Engraftment, vascularization, and neodermis thickness were evaluated.

Main Results:

  • Both Integra Artificial Skin and Matriderm showed identical efficiency and quality of vascularization.
  • The take rate of the epidermis and the thickness of the resulting neodermis were comparable between the two matrices.
  • No significant differences were observed in the vascularization or engraftment.

Conclusions:

  • This study's findings indicate no major differences between Matriderm and Integra Artificial Skin in terms of engraftment and vascularization in a rat model.
  • The results suggest both matrices are equally effective for skin regeneration applications.
  • Further studies may explore long-term outcomes and clinical relevance.