Search

Hypertrophic scars continue to be a major burden, especially after burns. Persistent inflammation during wound healing appears to be the precipitating aspect in pathologic scarring. The lack of a standardized model hinders research from fully elucidating pathophysiology and therapy, as most therapeutic approaches have sparse evidence. The goal of this project was to investigate the mechanisms of scar formation after prolonged wound inflammation and to introduce a method for generating standardized hypertrophic scars by inducing prolonged inflammation. Four wound types were created in Duroc pigs: full-thickness wounds, burn wounds, and both of them with induced hyperinflammation by resiquimod. Clinical assessment (Vancouver Scar Scale), tissue oxygenation by hyperspectral imaging, histologic assessment, and gene expression analysis were performed at various time points during the following five months. Native burn wounds as well as resiquimod-induced full-thickness and burn wounds resulted in more hypertrophic scars than full-thickness wounds. The scar scale showed significantly higher scores in burn- and resiquimod-induced wounds compared with full-thickness wounds as of day 77. These three wound types also showed relative hypoxia compared with uninduced full-thickness wounds in hyperspectral imaging and increased expression of HIF1a levels. The highest number of inflammatory cells was detected in resiquimod-induced full-thickness wounds with histologic features of hypertrophic scars in burn and resiquimod-induced wounds. Gene expression analysis revealed increased inflammation with only moderately altered fibrosis markers. We successfully created hypertrophic scars in the Duroc pig by using different wound etiologies. Inflammation caused by burns or resiquimod induction led to scars similar to human hypertrophic scars. This model may allow for the further investigation of the exact mechanisms of pathological scars, the role of hypoxia and inflammation, and the testing of therapeutic approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Backgroundand Objectives: Hypertrophic scars following surgeries or burns present a serious concern for many patients because these scars not only lead to an aesthetical but also to a functional and psychological burden. Treatment of hypertrophic scars is challenging because despite various treatment options, a low level of evidence hinders preference of any specific treatment plan. To properly identify new therapeutic approaches, the use of in vivo models remains indispensable. A gold standard for hypertrophic scars has not been established to date. This review aims at giving a comprehensive overview of the available in vivo models. Materials and Methods: PubMed and CINAHL were queried for currently existing models. Results: Models with mice, rats, rabbits, pigs, guinea pigs and dogs are used in hypertrophic scar research. Rodent models provide the advantage of ready availability and low costs, but the number of scars per animal is limited due to their relatively small body surface, leading to a high number of test animals which should be avoided according to the 3Rs. Multiple scars per animal can be created in the guinea pig and rabbit ear model; but like other rodent models, these models exhibit low transferability to human conditions. Pig models show a good transferability, but are cost-intensive and require adequate housing facilities. Further, it is not clear if a currently available pig model can deliver clinical and histological features of human hypertrophic scars concurrently. Conclusions: None of the analyzed animal models can be clearly recommended as a standard model in hypertrophic scar research because the particular research question must be considered to elect a suitable model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hypertrophic scars are still a major burden for numerous patients, especially after burns. Many treatment options are available; however, no evidence‐based treatment protocol is available with recommendations mostly emerging from experience or lower quality studies. This review serves to discuss the currently available literature. A systematic review was performed and the databases PubMed and Web of Science were searched for suitable publications. Only original articles in English that dealt with the treatment of hypertrophic scars in living humans were analyzed. Further, studies with a level of evidence lower than 1 as defined by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons were excluded. After duplicate exclusion, 1638 studies were screened. A qualitative assessment yielded 163 articles eligible for evidence grading. Finally nine studies were included. Four of them used intralesional injections, four topical therapeutics and one assessed the efficacy of CO2‐laser. Intralesional triamcinolone + fluorouracil injections, and topical pressure and/or silicone therapy revealed significant improvements in terms of scar height, pliability, and pigmentation. This systematic review showed that still few high‐quality studies exist to evaluate therapeutic means and their mechanisms for hypertrophic scars. Among these, most of them assessed the efficacy of intralesional triamcinolone injections with the same treatment protocol. Intralesional injection appears to be the best option for hypertrophic scar treatment. Future studies should focus on a possible optimization of infiltrative therapies, consistent end‐point evaluations, adequate follow‐up periods, and possibly intraindividual treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]