Wound Dressing Selection Is Critical to Enhance Platelet-Rich Fibrin Activities in Wound Care.

The use of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) is investigated in ulcer management because it provides a healing milieu rich in growth factors and cytokines. Although crucial, the relevance of secondary dressings is under-researched and no data support the use of any particular dressing in preference to another. We assessed the properties of different dressing categories, including alginates, hydrocolloids, foams, hydrofibers, films, meshes and gauzes, in terms of affinity for PRF, releasate management (retention/extrusion) and the kinetics of cytokine release as well as the influence of each combination product, [PRF + dressing], on dermal cell behaviour, aiming to provide useful information for choosing the most adequate dressing for each particular patient. Active dressings including alginates, hydrofibers, foams and hydrocolloids blend with PRF, creating a diverse combination of products with different performances. Alginate and hydrofiber showed the highest affinity but moderate retention of releasate, without interfering with cell functions. Instead, the foam sequestered the releasate and hindered the release of growth factors, thereby compromising cell activities. Film and mesh presented very poor releasate retention and performed similarly to PRF by itself. Affinity index and releasate management explained 79% of platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF-BB) concentration variability, p < 0.001. Cell proliferation depended on the ability of the combination product to retain/release supernatant, PDGF-BB concentration and cell adhesion R2 = 0.91, p = 0.014.

Biological approach for the management of non-healing diabetic foot ulcers.

OBJECTIVE: To show an approach to profit of the main components of platelet rich plasma (PRP), i.e. the signaling proteins, and the fibrin scaffold and discuss the intervention within TIME (Tissue, Inflammation/Infection, Moisture, Edges) framework. METHODS: Two patients with diabetic foot ulcers are treated with both liquid and gelled PRP, and the rationale for the PRP intervention is described herein. Autologous blood is withdrawn and, PRP is separated by single spinning and activated with CaCl2 prior to application. PRP is injected in an activated liquid form, i.e. freshly activated, before coagulation, within the wound edges. In fibrotic tissue PRP is introduced performing a needling procedure. In addition, PRP, clotted ex-vivo, is applied in the wound bed as a primary dressing. RESULTS: Both patients responded positively to PRP intervention. Case 1 healed after five weekly PRP applications. Case 2 healed after eight weekly PRP applications. Patient satisfaction was high in both cases. The procedure had no complications, is well tolerated and easy to perform in any medical setting. CONCLUSION: PRP intervention is safe and if associated with correct tissue debridement and preparation of the host tissue it may help to decrease the burden of diabetic foot ulcers. Carefully designed randomized clinical trials with special attention to the PRP procedure are needed to assess the efficacy of these interventions.