European Journal of Plastic Surgery

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 171–177 | Cite as

Moist exposed burn therapy: evaluation of the wound healing process. An experimental model to assess the efficacy of local agents on wound repair in partial- and full-thickness wounds

  • E. TsatiEmail author
  • P. Panayotou
  • J. Ioannovich
Original Paper


The porcine model was used to investigate the wound healing process. 116 partial and full-thickness wounds were induced on the back of the animals using the CO2 Three local dressing agents were tested: Povidone Iodine, Silver Sulphadiazine and MEBO ointments. The following parameters were evaluated: physical examination, photography, pH, transepidermal water loss and moisture of the wound, planimetry and histological assessment of injury. The measurement of different parameters revealed that partial-thickness burn wounds were better assessed using Transepidermal Water Loss (TEWL), while full-thickness ones are better assessed using planimetry, measuring the surface of the wound. MEBO significantly accelerates the wound healing process of partial- (inflicted by CO2 Laser) and full-thickness excised wounds when compared to other local agents applied on wounds similar in size, extent and cause and the control group.


Moist exposed burn therapy Wound repair Porcine model 


  1. 1.
    Alvarez OM, Mertz PM, Eaglstein WH (1982) The effect of proline analogue 1-azetidine-2-carboxylic acid (LACA) on epidermal and dermal wound repair. J Plast Reconstr Surg 69:284–289Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Breuing K, Eriksson E, Liu P, Miller D (1992) Healing of partial thickness porcine skin wounds in a liquid environment. J Surg Res 52:50–58CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen WYJ, Rogers AA, Lydon MJ (1992) Characterization of biologic properties of wound fluid collected during early stages of wound healing. J Invest Dermatol 99:559–564PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chilcott RP, Brown RF, Rice P (2000) Non -invasive quantification of skin injury resulting from exposure to sulphur mustard and Lewesite vapours. Burns 26(3):245–250CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eaglstein WH, Mertz PM (1980) Inert vehicles do affect wound healing. J Invest Dermatol 74:90–91PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Graves CJ, Edwards C, Marks R (1993) A model of measured percussive mechanical trauma and its effects on skin. Br J Dermatol 129(5):558–562PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hinman CD, Maibach H (1963) Effect of air exposure and occlusion on experimental human skin wounds. Nature 200:377–378PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hunt T (2000) Discussion on “Accelerated healing of full- thickness skin wounds in a wet environment”. Plast Reconstr Surg 106(3):613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ioannovich J, Tsati E, Tsoutsos D, Frangia K, Papalois A (2000) Moist exposed burn therapy: evaluation of the epithelial repair process (an experimental model). Ann Burns Fire Disast 13(1):3–9Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li Chuanjiu et al (1995) Clinical application of MEBO for treating thermal injuries (report of 217 cases). IBID 4:19Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nilsson GE (1977) Measurement of water exchange through skin. Med Biol Eng Comput 15:209–218PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Qu Yunying et al (1997) Experimental research on the mechanism of the effect of MEBO. IBID 4:4Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rutter N (2000) Clinical consequences of an immature barrier. Semin Neonatol 5(4):281–287CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schmuth M, Sztankay A, Weinlich G, Linder DM, Wimmer MA, Fritsch PO, Fritsch E (2001) Permeability barrier function of skin exposed to ionizing radiation. Arch Dermatol 137(8):1019–1023PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Suetake T, Sasai S, Zhen YX, Ohi T, Tagami H (1996) Functional analysis of the stratum corneum in scars. Sequential studies after injury and comparison among keloids, hypertrophic scars and atrophic scars. Arch Dermatol 132(12):1453–1458CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Svensjo T, Pomahac B, Yao F, Slama J, Eriksson E (2000) Accelerated healing of full-thickness skin wounds in a wet environment. Plast Reconstr Surg 106(3):602–612CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vogt PM, Andree CA, Breuing K (1995) Dry, moist and wet skin wound repair. Ann Plast Surg 34:493–499PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weinstein GD (1965) Autoradiographic studies of turnover time and protein synthesis in pig epidermis. J Invest Dermatol 44:413–419PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wheeler ES, Miller TA (1976) The blister and the second degree burn in guinea pigs: the effect of exposure. Plast Reconstr Surg 57:74–83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wilson DR, Maibach H (eds) (1989) Transepidermal water loss: A review in Leveque JL: Cutaneous investigation in Health and disease. Non-invasive methods and instrumentation. Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Winter GD (1962) Formation of the scab and the rate of epithelialization of superficial wounds in the skin of the young domestic pig. Nature, 193(4812):293–294Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Winter GD, Scales JT (1963) Effect of air drying and dressings on the surface of a wound. Nature 197:91–92Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zawacki BE (1974) Reversal of capillary stasis and prevention of necrosis in burns. Ann Surg 180:98–102PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plastic Surgery, Microsurgery and Burn CenterGeneral State Hospital of Athens “G. Gennimatas”AthensGreece
  2. 2.HalandriGreece

Personalised recommendations