• Sonia Gaucher, Carole Nicco, Mohamed Jarraya, and Frédéric Batteux.
• Université Paris Descartes, Faculté de Médecine, Paris, France. sonia.gaucher@cch.aphp.fr
• Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2010 Sep 1;9(3):132-40.

AbstractHuman skin allografts are considered one of the best temporary biological coverages for severe burn patients. Human skin allografts can be either viable or nonviable depending on their preservation modalities. However, there is a debate about the use of viable versus nonviable skin for severe burn patients because there is no established correlation between viability and efficacy of coverage. The authors tried to correlate the viability of cryopreserved human skin allografts as assessed by the MTT assay, with efficacy of coverage, intensity of rejection at day 8, and delay of wound healing in a xenograft model using human fresh skin (FS) and cryopreserved skin (CPS) on murine recipients (n = 49). Cryopreserved grafts were less rejectable than fresh grafts, with statistically significant different delays (P = .0008). Mice that had received grafts healed with delays; the delays, whether associated with fresh grafts or cryopreserved grafts, were not statistically significant. On day 8 after the graft, the overall damage score for the tissue's histological architectural integrity was higher for FS. Furthermore, flow cytometry analysis showed a significant increase in the number of CD4 and CD8 T-cells (P = .001) in the spleens of FS-grafted mice. These results confirm that the use of viable CPS does not change the potential for healing.

24 keywords...

hide…