Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Efficacy of Type-1 Fish Collagen Membrane v/s Human Amniotic Membrane as a Surgical Dressing Material in Maxillofacial Wounds: A Comparative Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Management of maxillofacial wounds holds a major challenge for surgeons due to aesthetic concerns. Type I Fish Collagen Membrane and Human Amniotic Membrane (HAM), biologic materials have attained importance in various clinical fields, especially in wound healing. Though both materials have their own unique properties, there is a need to compare and evaluate the efficacy of Type I Fish Collagen Membrane and HAM as a surgical dressing material for soft tissue defects in Head and Neck region. A study encompassed total of 60 patients with maxillofacial wounds resulted either from trauma or by wide excision or ablation therapy of various benign pathologies in head and neck region. They were randomly divided into two groups, with 30 patients in each group. The groups were evaluated using following parameters like ease of operability, pain relief, wound healing, and safety of the membrane. The results indicated that pain relief and healing were much better in HAM cases and like operability and safety of the membranes were equally good. No complications such as infection, burning sensation, or graft rejection were noted. HAM dressing may be considered as safe, cheap and effective alternative method for treating head and neck wounds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Khademi B, Bahranifard H, Azarpira N, Behboodi E (2013) Clinical application of amniotic membrane as a biologic dressing in oral cavity and pharyngeal defects after tumor resection. Arch Iran Med 16(9):503–506

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bhattacharya V et al (2012) Indian J Plast Surg 45(3):436–443

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Luitaud C, Laflflamme C, Semlali A et al (2007) Development of an engineering autologous palatal mucosa-like tissue for potential clinical applications. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 83:554–561

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Yamada M, Kubo K, Ueno T et al (2010) Alleviation of commercial collagen sponge- and membrane-induced apoptosis and dysfunction in cultured osteoblasts by an aminoacid derivative. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 25:939–946

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zimmer Dental. Absorbable collagen wound dressings; CollaTape, CollaCote and CollaPlug [package insert]. Zimmer Dental, Carlsbad, CA.

  6. Tang J, Saito T (2015) Biocompatibility of novel type I collagen purified from Tilapia Fish Scale: an in vitro comparative study. Biomed Res Int 2:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  7. Paramhans D, Mathur RK, Newaskar V, Shukla S, Sudrania MK (2010) Role of collagen membrane for reconstruction of buccal defects following fibrotic band excision and coronoidectomy in oral submucous fibrosis. Mp soc otolaryngol waent 3:109–112

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pradhan H, Gupta H, Sinha V, Gupta S, Shashikanth MC (2012) Two wound-covering materials in the surgical treatment of oral submucous fibrosis: a clinical comparison. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res 2(1):10–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Davis JW (1910) Skin transplantation with a review of 550 cases at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. Johns Hopkins Med J 15:307

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kar IB, Singh AK, Mohapatra PC, Mohanty PK, Misra S (2014) Repair of oral mucosal defects with cryopreserved human amniotic membrane grafts: prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 43:1339–1344

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. ElHeneidy H, Omran E, Halwagy A, Al-Inany H, Al-Ansary M (2016) AmrGad: amniotic membrane can be a valid source for a wound healing. Int J Women’s Health 8:225–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Insausti C, Blanquer M, Bleda P, Iniesta P, Majado MJ, Castellanos G et al (2010) The amniotic membrane as a source of stem cells. Histol Histopathol 25:91–98

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dhall K (1984) Amnion graft for treatment of congenital absence of the vagina. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 91:279–282

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Qureshi I, Fareeha A, Khan W (2010) Technique for processing and preservation of human amniotic membrane for ocular surface reconstruction. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 1:45

    Google Scholar 

  15. Junkins-Hopkins JM (2011) Biologic dressings. J Am Acad Dermatol 64:e5–e7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Yang JY, Chuang SS, Yang WG, Tsay PK (2003) Egg membrane as a new biological dressing in split-thickness skin graft donor sites: a preliminary clinical evaluation. Chang Gung Med J 26:153–159

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Thomas S (2000) Alginate dressings in surgery and wound management: part 2. J Wound Care 9:115–119

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Rastogi S, Modi M, Sathian B (2009) Collagen membrane as wound dressing material. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67(8):1600–1606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hajiiski O, Anatassov N (1990) Amniotic membranes for temporary burn coverage. Ann Burns Fire Disast 9:88–92

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mohammadi AA, Seyed Jafari SM, Kiasat M, Tavakkolian AR, Imani MT, Ayaz M et al (2013) Effect of fresh human amniotic membrane dressing on graft take in patients with chronic burn wounds compared with conventional methods. Burns 39:349–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ahmedabad, India

    Vishalkumar Boricha

  2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, A.J. Institute of Dental Science, Mangalore, India

    K. Deepak Pai & Manjunath Rai

  3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Trauma Center, IMS, BHU, Varanasi, India

    Mital R. Asodariya

  4. Dis-Amreli, India

    Mital R. Asodariya

Authors
  1. Vishalkumar Boricha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Deepak Pai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manjunath Rai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mital R. Asodariya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mital R. Asodariya.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Patient Consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form, the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal and identity will not be published, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Boricha, V., Pai, K.D., Rai, M. et al. Efficacy of Type-1 Fish Collagen Membrane v/s Human Amniotic Membrane as a Surgical Dressing Material in Maxillofacial Wounds: A Comparative Study. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-022-01758-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-022-01758-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation