Salloum A, Bazzi N, Squires S, Chu T, Benedetto P, Benedetto A. Comparing the application of various engineered xenografts for skin defects: A systematic review.
J Cosmet Dermatol 2023;
22:921-931. [PMID:
36409467 DOI:
10.1111/jocd.15517]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2022] [Revised: 09/23/2022] [Accepted: 10/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Xenografts are a now a cornerstone in the management of wound dressings. Promising results were achieved since 1960 in the application of skin substitute for skin defects.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of various xenografts.
METHODS
A literature research was conducted using the following query: 'Porcine skin dermatology substitute', 'bovine skin dermatology substitute', 'xenograft skin substitute dermatology', 'xenografts skin defect', 'porcine skin defect', 'bovine skin defect'.
RESULTS
The review yielded 35 articles pertaining to the topic. Main indications for porcine and bovine xenograft application were burn wounds and post-traumatic wounds, respectively. Mean discharge date or length of stay was at the 6th day after porcine application, and the time of graft healing was reported for 33.7% (n = 510) of patients. Promising results were seen with Matriderm and split-thickness skin graft. Most wounds achieved an excellent cosmetic result with full range of motion and a smooth contour appearance. A great variety of tissue substitutes exist, and the choice of graft application should depend on a patient's factors, product availability, wound type, size, and physician's factors.
CONCLUSION
In summary, xenografts are more economic and affordable but have higher risk of infections compared to allografts.
Collapse