Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Review

The clinical outcomes of xenografts in the treatment of burn patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors: Rana Irilouzadian, Amirmohammad Khalaji, Hediyeh Baghsheikhi, Roham Sarmadian, Soodabeh Hoveidamanesh, Tayyeb Ghadimi, Siamak Farokh Forghani

Published in: European Journal of Medical Research | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Background

Although autografts are not feasible in patients with extensive burn wounds, allografts and xenografts can be used for temporary coverage. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the outcomes of xenografts and the standard treatment of burn wounds.

Methods

International online databases were searched for English articles comparing xenografts with routine treatment in the burn patients. The random-effects model was used to estimate standardized mean differences (SMD) or odds ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

From a total of 7144 records, 14 studies were included in our review after screening by title and abstracts followed by full-texts. No significant difference in hospital stays was found between the mammalian xenografts and control groups (SMD [95% CI] = − 0.18 [− 0.54–0.18]). The mean number of dressing changes was significantly lower in both mammalian xenografts compared to the controls (SMD [95% CI] = − 1.01 [− 1.61–− 0.41]) and fish xenografts compared to controls (SMD [95% CI] = − 6.16 [− 7.65–− 4.66]). In the fish xenografts, re-epithelialization time was significantly lower compared to controls (SMD [95% CI] = − 1.18 [− 2.23–− 0.14]).

Conclusions

Xenografts showed a significantly lower number of dressing changes and fish xenografts showed significant benefit in re-epithelialization compared to routine treatment. The beneficial results of xenografts suggest further research in the use of different types of xenografts in patients with extensive burn.

Available only for authorised users

Jeschke MG, van Baar ME, Choudhry MA, Chung KK, Gibran NS, Logsetty S. Burn injury. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2020;6(1):11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-020-0145-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Shpichka A, Butnaru D, Bezrukov EA, et al. Skin tissue regeneration for burn injury. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2019;10(1):94. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-019-1203-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Finnerty CC, Jeschke MG, Branski LK, Barret JP, Dziewulski P, Herndon DN. Hypertrophic scarring: the greatest unmet challenge after burn injury. Lancet. 2016;388(10052):1427–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(16)31406-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Rashaan ZM, Krijnen P, Klamer RR, Schipper IB, Dekkers OM, Breederveld RS. Nonsilver treatment vs silver sulfadiazine in treatment of partial-thickness burn wounds in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Wound Repair Regenerat. 2014;22(4):473–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.12196.CrossRef

Castellano JJ, Shafii SM, Ko F, et al. Comparative evaluation of silver-containing antimicrobial dressings and drugs. Int Wound J. 2007;4(2):114–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-481X.2007.00316.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hosseini SN, Karimian A, Mousavinasab SN, Rahmanpour H, Yamini M, Zahmatkesh SH. Xenoderm versus 1% silver sulfadiazine in partial-thickness burns. Asian J Surg. 2009;32(4):234–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1015-9584(09)60400-0.CrossRefPubMed

Kitala D, Klama-Baryła A, Łabuś W, et al. Porcine transgenic, acellular material as an alternative for human skin. Transplant Proc. 2020;52(7):2218–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2020.01.125.CrossRefPubMed

Rowan MP, Cancio LC, Elster EA, et al. Burn wound healing and treatment: review and advancements. Critical Care. 2015;19:243. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-0961-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hakkarainen T, Koivuniemi R, Kosonen M, et al. Nanofibrillar cellulose wound dressing in skin graft donor site treatment. J Controll Release Off J Controlled Release Soc. 2016;244(Pt B):292–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.07.053.CrossRef

10.

Aronoff M, Fleishman P, Simon DL. Experience in the application of porcine xenografts to split-graft donor sites. J Trauma. 1976;16(4):280–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005373-197604000-00005.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Burkey B, Davis W 3rd, Glat PM. Porcine xenograft treatment of superficial partial-thickness burns in paediatric patients. J Wound Care. 2016;25(2):S10–5. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2016.25.Sup2.S10.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Kimsa-Dudek M, Strzalka-Mrozik B, Kimsa MW, et al. Screening pigs for xenotransplantation: expression of porcine endogenous retroviruses in transgenic pig skin. Transgenic Res. 2015;24(3):529–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-015-9871-y.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Costa BA, Lima Júnior EM, de Moraes Filho MO, et al. Use of tilapia skin as a xenograft for pediatric burn treatment: a case report. J Burn Care Res Off Publicat Am Burn Associat. 2019;40(5):714–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irz085.CrossRef

14.

Dias M, Bilhar APM, Rios LC, et al. Neovaginoplasty using nile tilapia fish skin as a new biologic graft in patients with mayer-rokitansky-küster-hauser syndrome. J Minimally Invasive Gynecol. 2020;27(4):966–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2019.09.779.CrossRef

15.

Lima EM, de Moraes MO, Costa BA, et al. Innovative burn treatment using tilapia skin as a xenograft: a phase II randomized controlled trial. Article J Burn Care Res. 2020;41(3):585–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irz205.CrossRef

16.

Alves A, Lima Júnior EM, Piccolo NS, et al. Study of tensiometric properties, microbiological and collagen content in nile tilapia skin submitted to different sterilization methods. Cell Tissue Bank. 2018;19(3):373–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10561-017-9681-y.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg. 2021;88:105906.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al. The cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Bmj. 2011;343:d5928. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d5928.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Sterne JAC, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4919.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Hooijmans CR, Rovers MM, de Vries RBM, Leenaars M, Ritskes-Hoitinga M, Langendam MW. SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool for animal studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14(1):43. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557–60. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Feng XS, Tan JJ, Pan YG, et al. Control of hypertrophic scar from inception by using xenogenic (porcine) acellular dermal matrix (ADM) to cover deep second degree burn. Article Burns. 2006;32(3):293–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2005.10.006.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Karlsson M, Elmasry M, Steinvall I, et al. Biosynthetic cellulose compared to porcine xenograft in the treatment of partial-thickness burns: a randomised clinical trial. Burns. 2022;48(5):1236–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2021.09.017.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Zajicek R, Matouskova E, Broz L, Kubok R, Waldauf P, Königova R. New biological temporary skin cover Xe-Derma(®) in the treatment of superficial scald burns in children. Burns. 2011;37(2):333–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2010.07.009.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Tuleubayev B, Ogay V, Anapiya B, et al. Therapeutic treatment of 2A grade burns with decellularized bovine peritoneum as a xenograft: multicenter randomized clinical trial. Medicina. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58060819.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Zuo HB, Song GD, Shi W, Jia J, Zhang YH. Observation of viable alloskin vs xenoskin grafted onto subcutaneous tissue wounds after tangential excision in massive burns. Article Burns Trauma. 2016;4:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41038-016-0045-9.CrossRef

27.

Chen X, Feng X, Julin X, et al. Application of acellular dermal xenografts in full-thickness skin burns. Exp Ther Med. 2013;6:194–8. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2013.1114.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Hosseini SN, Mousavinasab SN, Rahmanpour H, Shoghli A. Xenoderm versus “conventional” treatment in pediatrics burns. Article Int J Pharmacol. 2008;4(1):46–50. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijp.2008.46.50.CrossRef

29.

Hosseini SN, Mousavinasab SN, Rahmanpour H, Fallahnezhad M. A biological dressing versus “conventional” treatment in patients with massive burns: a clinical trial. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2009;15(2):135–40.PubMed

30.

Li DS, Sun WQ, Wang T, et al. Evaluation of a novel tilapia-skin acellular dermis matrix rationally processed for enhanced wound healing. Mater Sci Eng C-Mater Biol Appl. 2021;127:112202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2021.112202.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Lima Júnior EM, Moraes Filho MO, Forte AJ, et al. Pediatric burn treatment using tilapia skin as a xenograft for superficial partial-thickness wounds: a pilot study. J Burn Care Res. 2020;41(2):241–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irz149.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Lima EM, de Moraes MO, Costa BA, et al. Nile tilapia fish skin-based wound dressing improves pain and treatment-related costs of superficial partial-thickness burns: a phase iii randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;147(5):1189–98. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000007895.CrossRef

33.

Stone R II, Larson D, Wall J, et al. 522 Omega-3 rich fish skin grafts reduce donor skin requirements for full thickness burns. J Burn Care Res. 2018;39(suppl_1):S234–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/iry006.445.CrossRef

34.

Stone R 2nd, Saathoff EC, Larson DA, et al. Accelerated wound closure of deep partial thickness burns with acellular fish skin graft. Int J Mol Sci. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22041590.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Lima Júnior EM, De Moraes Filho MO, Costa BA, et al. Innovative burn treatment using tilapia skin as a xenograft: a phase II randomized controlled trial. J Burn Care Res. 2020;41(3):585–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irz205.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Lima Júnior EM, de Moraes Filho MO, Costa BA, et al. Nile tilapia fish skin-based wound dressing improves pain and treatment-related costs of superficial partial-thickness burns: a phase III randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;147(5):1189–98. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000007895.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Guo S, Dipietro LA. Factors affecting wound healing. J Dent Res. 2010;89(3):219–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034509359125.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Lindholm C, Searle R. Wound management for the 21st century: combining effectiveness and efficiency. Int Wound J. 2016;13(Suppl 2):5–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12623.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Hussain A, Dunn KW. Predicting length of stay in thermal burns: a systematic review of prognostic factors. Burns. 2013;39(7):1331–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2013.04.026.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Nielson CB, Duethman NC, Howard JM, Moncure M, Wood JG. Burns: pathophysiology of systemic complications and current management. J Burn Care Res. 2017;38(1):e469–81. https://doi.org/10.1097/bcr.0000000000000355.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Brown NJ, Kimble RM, Gramotnev G, Rodger S, Cuttle L. Predictors of re-epithelialization in pediatric burn. Burns. 2014;40(4):751–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2013.09.027.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Demling RH, Leslie DeSanti MD. The rate of re-epithelialization across meshed skin grafts is increased with exposure to silver. Burns. 2002;28(3):264–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0305-4179(01)00119-x.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Saavedra PAE, De Oliveira Leal JV, Areda CA, Galato D. The costs of burn victim hospital care around the world: a systematic review. Iran J Public Health. 2021;50(5):866–78. https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v50i5.6104.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Lagziel T, Asif M, Born L, et al. Evaluating the efficacy, safety, and tolerance of silver sulfadiazine dressings once daily versus twice daily in the treatment of burn wounds. J Burn Care Res. 2021;42(6):1136–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irab141.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Johnson LS, Shupp JW, Pavlovich AR, Pezzullo JC, Jeng JC, Jordan MH. Hospital length of stay–does 1% TBSA really equal 1 day? J Burn Care Res. 2011;32(1):13–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/BCR.0b013e318204b3ab.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Taylor SL, Sen S, Greenhalgh DG, Lawless M, Curri T, Palmieri TL. Real-time prediction for burn length of stay via median residual hospital length of stay methodology. J Burn Care Res Sep-Oct. 2016;37(5):e476–82. https://doi.org/10.1097/bcr.0000000000000332.CrossRef

Title: The clinical outcomes of xenografts in the treatment of burn patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors: Rana Irilouzadian
Amirmohammad Khalaji
Hediyeh Baghsheikhi
Roham Sarmadian
Soodabeh Hoveidamanesh
Tayyeb Ghadimi
Siamak Farokh Forghani
Publication date: 01-12-2023
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: European Journal of Medical Research / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 2047-783X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-023-01505-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

The clinical outcomes of xenografts in the treatment of burn patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Correction: Effects of metformin therapy on HMGB1 levels in rheumatoid arthritis patients

A study on endovascular treatment alone and bridging treatment for acute ischemic stroke

The predictive value of deep learning-based cardiac ultrasound flow imaging for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy complicating arrhythmias

Safety and efficacy of enterprise stenting for symptomatic atherosclerotic severe posterior circulation stenosis

Association of tirofiban treatment with outcomes following endovascular therapy in cardioembolic stroke: insights from the RESCUE BT randomized trial

Disulfidptosis-related signatures for prognostic and immunotherapy reactivity evaluation in hepatocellular carcinoma