Citation

Kogan S, Halsey J, Agag RL. Ann. Plast. Surg. 2019; 83(1): 26-33.

Affiliation

Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School. Newark, NJ.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins)

DOI

10.1097/SAP.0000000000001915

PMID

31194708

Abstract

There have been significant advances in the care of burns over the past decade. As a result of the improved survival of burn patients, attention has shifted to the optimized management of their wounds. Traditionally, autografts have been described as the gold standard treatment in cases of deep second- and third-degree burn wounds; however, they are limited especially in large surface area burns. As such, advancements have been made in the development of biologic dressings, which attempt to mimic the function of the lost epidermis and/or dermis. The ideal biologic dressing is nontoxic, lacks antigenicity, is immunologically compatible, and is sterile. Additionally, easy storage conditions, long shelf lives, and reasonable costs are key determinants of whether biologic dressings may truly be widely used in the clinical setting. Biologic dressings serve an important role as skin substitutes in the setting of acute burn injury. This review aims to summarize the multitude of available biologic dressings and their applications.

METHODS: The PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched for the following terms either alone or in combination: "burn injury," "biologic membrane," "skin substitutes," "biosynthetic dressings," and "acellular membrane."

Language: en