Cellular benefits of single-use negative pressure wound therapy demonstrated in a novel ex vivo human skin wound model.

Negative pressure wound therapy is a widely used treatment for chronic, nonhealing wounds. Surprisingly, few studies have systematically evaluated the cellular and molecular effects of negative pressure treatment on human skin. In addition, no study to date has directly compared recently available single-use negative pressure modalities to traditional negative pressure devices in a controlled setting. Here we developed a novel large-scale ex vivo human skin culture system to effectively evaluate the efficacy of two different negative pressure wound therapy modalities. Single-use and traditional negative pressure devices were applied to human ex vivo wounded skin sheets cultured over a period of 48 hours. Cellular tissue response to therapy was evaluated via a combination of histological analysis and transcriptional profiling, in samples collected from the wound edge, skin adjacent to the wound, and an extended skin region. Single-use negative pressure wound therapy caused less damage to wound edge tissue than traditional application, demonstrated by improved skin barrier, reduced dermal-epidermal junction disruption and a dampened damage response. Transcriptional profiling confirmed significantly less activation of multiple pro-inflammatory markers in wound edge skin treated with single-use vs traditional negative pressure therapy. These findings may help to explain the greater efficacy of sNPWT in the clinic, while offering a noninvasive system to develop improved NPWT-based therapies.

Pre-Clinical Assessment of Single-Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy During In Vivo Porcine Wound Healing.

Objective: Traditional negative pressure wound therapy (tNPWT) systems can be large and cumbersome, limiting patient mobility and adversely affecting quality of life. PICO™, a no canister single-use system, offers a lightweight, portable alternative to tNPWT, with improved clinical performance. The aim of this study was to determine the potential mechanism(s) of action of single-use NPWT (sNPWT) versus tNPWT. Approach: sNPWT and tNPWT were applied to an in vivo porcine excisional wound model, following product use guidelines. Macroscopic, histological, and biochemical analyses were performed at defined healing time points to assess multiple aspects of the healing response. Results: Wounds treated with single-use negative pressure displayed greater wound closure and increased reepithelialization versus those treated with traditional negative pressure. The resulting granulation tissue was more advanced with fewer neutrophils, reduced inflammatory markers, more mature collagen, and no wound filler-associated foreign body reactions. Of note, single-use negative pressure therapy failed to induce wound edge epithelial hyperproliferation, while traditional negative pressure therapy compromised periwound skin, which remained inflamed with high transepidermal water loss; features not observed following single-use treatment. Innovation: Single-use negative pressure was identified to improve multiple aspects of healing versus traditional negative pressure treatment. Conclusion: This study provides important new insight into the differing mode of action of single-use versus traditional negative pressure and may go some way to explaining the improved clinical outcomes observed with single-use negative pressure therapy.