Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32227459›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2020

Cryopreserved human skin allografts promote angiogenesis and dermal regeneration in a murine model.

Dominic Henn, Kellen Chen, Zeshaan N Maan, Autumn H Greco, Sylvia E Moortgat Illouz, Clark A Bonham, Janos A Barrera, Artem A Trotsyuk, Jagannath Padmanabhan, Arash Momeni and 4 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Application of delayed replantation of degloving skin preserved at 4Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Emerging treatment strategies in wound care.International wound journal · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Dominic HennHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4775-0151
Kellen ChenHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Zeshaan N MaanHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Autumn H GrecoHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Sylvia E Moortgat IllouzHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Clark A BonhamHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Janos A BarreraHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Artem A TrotsyukHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Jagannath PadmanabhanHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Arash MomeniHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Derrick C WanHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Dung NguyenHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Michael JanuszykHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Geoffrey C GurtnerHagey Laboratory for Pediatric and Regenerative Medicine, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Stanford University · USHeidelberg University · DE

Funding

Stanford University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cryopreserved human skin allografts (CHSAs) are used for the coverage of major burns when donor sites for autografts are insufficiently available and have clinically shown beneficial effects on chronic non-healing wounds. However, the biologic mechanisms behind the regenerative properties of CHSA remain elusive. Furthermore, the impact of cryopreservation on the immunogenicity of CHSA has not been thoroughly investigated and raised concerns with regard to their clinical application. To investigate the importance and fate of living cells, we compared cryopreserved CHSA with human acellular dermal matrix (ADM) grafts in which living cells had been removed by chemical processing. Both grafts were subcutaneously implanted into C57BL/6 mice and explanted after 1, 3, 7, and 28 days (n = 5 per group). A sham surgery where no graft was implanted served as a control. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and flow cytometry were used to characterise the ultrastructure and cells within CHSA before implantation. Immunofluorescent staining of tissue sections was used to determine the immune reaction against the implanted grafts, the rate of apoptotic cells, and vascularisation as well as collagen content of the overlaying murine dermis. Digital quantification of collagen fibre alignment on tissue sections was used to quantify the degree of fibrosis within the murine dermis. A substantial population of live human cells with intact organelles was identified in CHSA prior to implantation. Subcutaneous pockets with implanted xenografts or ADMs healed without clinically apparent rejection and with a similar cellular immune response. CHSA implantation largely preserved the cellularity of the overlying murine dermis, whereas ADM was associated with a significantly higher rate of cellular apoptosis, identified by cleaved caspase-3 staining, and a stronger dendritic cell infiltration of the murine dermis. CHSA was found to induce a local angiogenic response, leading to significantly more vascularisation of the murine dermis compared with ADM and sham surgery on day 7. By day 28, aggregate collagen-1 content within the murine dermis was greater following CHSA implantation compared with ADM. Collagen fibre alignment of the murine dermis, correlating with the degree of fibrosis, was significantly greater in the ADM group, whereas CHSA maintained the characteristic basket weave pattern of the native murine dermis. Our data indicate that CHSAs promote angiogenesis and collagen-1 production without eliciting a significant fibrotic response in a xenograft model. These findings may provide insight into the beneficial effects clinically observed after treatment of chronic wounds and burns with CHSA.

Indexed as

AllograftsAnimalsBurnsCell ProliferationCells, CulturedCryopreservationDisease Models, AnimalGraft SurvivalHumansMiceMice, Inbred C57BLSkin TransplantationWound Healingallograftangiogenesisfibrosissplit thickness skin graftwound healing

Identifiers

PMID32227459
PMCPMC7949424
OpenAlexW3013517611

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.