Use of Amniotic Membrane as Dressing in Cervical Necrotizing Fasciitis

Human acellular amniotic membrane implantation for lower third nasal reconstruction: a promising therapy to promote wound healing

Background

The lower third of the nose is one of the most important cosmetic units of the face, and its reconstructive techniques remain a big challenge. As an alternative approach to repair or regenerate the nasal tissue, the biomaterial-based strategy has been extensively investigated. The aim of this study is to determine the safety and efficacy of human acellular amniotic membrane (HAAM) to repair the full-thickness defects in the lower third of the nose in humans.

Methods

In this study, 180 patients who underwent excision of skin lesions of the lower third of the nose from 2012 to 2016 were included; of the patients, 92 received HAAM and Vaseline gauze treatments, and the other 88 patients received Vaseline gauze treatment only. The haemostasis time and the duration of operation were recorded during surgery; after surgery, the time to pain disappearance, scab formation and wound healing, and the wound healing rate were measured.

Results

Immediately after the HAAM implantation, a reduction of the haemostasis time and an accelerated disappearance of pain were observed. Compared with the control group, the formation and detachment of scab in patients who received the HAAM implantation were notably accelerated, postoperatively. When the diameter of the lesion exceeded 5 mm, the HAAM implantation was found to enhance the wound healing, although this enhancement was not seen when the diameter was less than 5 mm. Additionally, the HAAM implantation significantly reduced bleeding, wound infection and scar formation, postoperatively.

Conclusions

HAAM-assisted healing is a promising therapy for lower third nasal reconstruction leading to rapid wound healing and fewer complications and thus has considerable potential for extensive clinical application in repairing skin wounds.

Trial registration

ChiCTR1800017618, retrospectively registered on July 08, 2018.

Histological Comparison of New Bone Formation Using Amnion Membrane Graft Versus Resorbable Collagen Membrane: An Animal Study

The purpose of this article was to evaluate the bone induction effects of an amnion membrane-protected graft compared with a collagen membrane-protected graft in the repair of tibial bony defects in dogs. This study was performed using the tibial bone of dogs. After the removal of periosteum, similar holes were made with a 16-mm trephine drill (38 holes in total). For the study group, 10 holes were covered by absorbable collagen and 16 holes by amniotic membrane. In the control group, 12 holes were made and covered by the overlying soft tissue. Tibial bones were exposed after 6 and 12 weeks, and the samples were harvested and histologically processed. New bone formation was evaluated by histomorphometric study. Four Iranian mixed dogs older than 1.5 years were included in this study. The new bone formation was less in the control group when compared with the collagen group ( P = .863). The collagen group showed less bone formation than the amnion group ( P = .194), but this difference was not significant. However, bone formation in the amnion group was significantly more than in the control group ( P = .050). Using the amniotic membrane appears to accelerate bone formation in guided bone regeneration. However, further studies should investigate its clinical impact on bone healing.

Amniotic membrane in oral and maxillofacial surgery

PURPOSE

Following its renaissance in ophthalmology during the 1990s, preserved human amniotic membrane (HAM) has become an attractive biomaterial for all surgical disciplines. This article reviews the current and potential use of HAM in oral and maxillofacial surgery, its postulated properties and common preservation techniques.

METHODS

Literature was identified by an electronic search of PubMed in July 2012; this was supplemented from the reference lists of the consulted papers.

RESULTS

HAM has been used in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery from 1969 onwards because of its immunological preference and its pain-reducing, antimicrobial, mechanical and side-dependent adhesive or anti-adhesive properties. The effects of HAM on dermal and mucosal re-epithelialisation have been highlighted. Typically, HAM is applied after being banked in a glycerol-preserved, DMSO-preserved or freeze-dried and irradiated state. Whereas the use of HAM in flap surgery and in intra-oral and extra-oral lining is reported frequently, novel HAM applications in post-traumatic orbital surgery and temporomandibular joint surgery have been added since 2010. Tissue engineering with HAM is a fast-expanding field with a high variety of future options.

CONCLUSIONS

Preserved HAM is considered to be a safe and sufficient biomaterial in all fields of oral and maxillofacial wound healing. Recently published novel indications for HAM application lack a high level of evidence and need to be studied further.