Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMC

Biomaterials for Skin Substitutes

Sheikholeslam M., Wright MEE., Jeschke MG., Amini-Nik S.

Narrative Review on Burns, published in Adv Healthc Mater (2018) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Adv Healthc Mater (2018)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
29271580
PMCID
PMC7863571
DOI
10.1002/adhm.201700897
Citations
128

Abstract (original English)

Patients with extensive burns rely on the use of tissue engineered skin due to a lack of sufficient donor tissue, but it is a challenge to identify reliable and economical scaffold materials and donor cell sources for the generation of a functional skin substitute. The current review attempts to evaluate the performance of the wide range of biomaterials available for generating skin substitutes, including both natural biopolymers and synthetic polymers, in terms of tissue response and potential for use in the operating room. Natural biopolymers display an improved cell response, while synthetic polymers provide better control over chemical composition and mechanical properties. It is suggested that not one material meets all the requirements for a skin substitute. Rather, a composite scaffold fabricated from both natural and synthetic biomaterials may allow for the generation of skin substitutes that meet all clinical requirements including a tailored wound size and type, the degree of burn, the patient age, and the available preparation technique. This review aims to be a valuable directory for researchers in the field to find the optimal material or combination of materials based on their specific application.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
AnimalsHumansBurnsBiocompatible MaterialsTissue EngineeringSkin, Artificial

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research