Advertisement

Automatic Processing and Analysis of the Quality Healing of Derma Injury

  • Elena Semenova
  • Oleg Gerasimov
  • Elizaveta Koroleva
  • Nafis Ahmetov
  • Tatyana Baltina
  • Oskar SachenkovEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 831)

Abstract

Automation of analyzing the biological data can increase the quality of analyses and decrease spending time. Analyze of the microscope’s bitmaps is usual task in biology. To illustrate the proposed method we used analyzing collagen in dermis snapshots. Methodic to automatic analyses of microscope snapshots is presented. Object of analysis can be determine by color vector. Then the snapshot can be binarized and meshed. For every element we can restore distribution of the mean intercept length. Orientation of the objects can be calculated using approximation of the mean intercept length. Equation to estimate the quality of collagen recovery was presented. We used the method on samples of three types: no ficin group (N), ficin group (F), immobilized ficin (Fi). We tested 10 bitmaps for every group and we got results for all bitmaps according described technique. Quality of collagen recovery values was: for N group – 48% ± 8%, for F group 78 ± 7%, for Fi group 68 ± 9%. It can be concluded that ficin positively influence on dermas recovery. Received results are consistent with published results.

Keywords

Snapshot analysis Fabric tensor Collagen 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported be the grant of the President of the Russian Federation №MK-1717.2018.1

References

  1. 1.
    Yang, L., Liu, Y., Wu, H., Song, Z., Hoiby, N., et al.: Combating biofilms. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 65, 146–147 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Richards, J.J., Melander, C.: Controlling bacterial biofilms. ChemBioChem 10, 2287–2294 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Donlan, R.M.: Biofilms - microbial life on surfaces. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 8, 881–890 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Worthington, R.J., Blackledge, M.S., Melander, C.: Small-molecule inhibition of bacterial two-component systems to combat antibiotic resistance and virulence. Future Med. Chem. 5, 1265–1284 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blackledge, M.S., Worthington, R.J., Melander, C.: Biologically inspired strategies for combating bacterial biofilms. Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 13, 699–706 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sharafutdinov, I., Shigapova, Z., Baltin, M., Akhmetov, N., Bogachev, M.: HtrA protease from bacillus subtilis suppresses the bacterial fouling of the rat skin injuries. Bionanoscience 6, 564–567 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leroy, C., Delbarre-Ladrat, C., Ghillebaert, F., Compere, C., Combes, D.: Effects of commercial enzymes on the adhesion of a marine biofilm-forming bacterium. Biofouling 11, 11–22 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baidamshina, D.R., Trizna, E.Y., Holyavka, M.G., Boqachev, M.I., Artyukhov, V.G., et al.: Targeting microbial biofilms using Ficin, a nonspecific plant protease. Sci. Rep. 7, 46068 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Corr, D.T., Hart, D.A.: Biomechanics of scar tissue and uninjured skin. Adv. Wound Care 2, 37–43 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    van Zuijlen, P.P., Ruurda, J.J., van Veen, H.A., van Marle, J., van Trier, A.J., Groenevelt, F., Kreis, R.W., Middelkoop, E.: Collagen morphology in human skin and scar tissue: no adaptations in response to mechanical loading at joints. Burns 29(5), 423–431 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rawlins, J.M., Lam, W.L., Karoo, R.O., Naylor, I.L., Sharpe, D.T.: Quantifying collagen type in mature burn scars: a novel approach using histology and digital image analysis. J. Burn Care Res. 27(1), 60–65 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hooman, K., Zhong, Z., Calvin, N., Janette, Z., Xinli, Z., Joyce, W., Kang, T., Chia, S.A.: Quantitative approach to scar analysis. Am. J. Pathol. 178(2), 621–628 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpath.2010.10.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shigapova, F.A., Baltina, T.V., Konoplev, Y.G., Sachenkov, O.A.: Methods for automatic processing and analysis of orthotropic biological structures by microscopy and computed. Int. J. Pharm. Technol. 8(3), 14953–14964 (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gerasimov, O., Shigapova, F., Konoplev, Y., Sachenkov, O.: Evaluation of the stress-strain state of a one-dimensional heterogeneous porous structure. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 158, no. 1, p. 012036 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gerasimov, O., Shigapova, F., Konoplev, Y., Sachenkov, O.: The evolution of the bone in the half-plane under the influence of external pressure. In: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 158, no. 1, p. 012037 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Harrigan, T.P., Mann, R.W.: Characterization of microstructural anisotropy in orthotropic materials using a second rank tensor. J. Mater. Sci. 19, 761–767 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chernov, N., Ma, H.: Computer vision, least squares fitting of quadratic curves and surfaces, pp. 287–302 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kazan Federal UniversityKazanRussia

Personalised recommendations