Download PDF
CC BY-NC 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2012; 39(04): 317-321
DOI: 10.5999/aps.2012.39.4.317
Original Article

Comparison of the Wound Healing Effect of Cellulose and Gelatin: An In Vivo Study

Bum Sik Kang
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Wonkwang University Hospital, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Iksan, Korea
,
Young Cheon Na
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Wonkwang University Hospital, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Iksan, Korea
Wonkwang Institute of Clinical Medicine, Iksan, Korea
,
Young Wan Jin
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Wonkwang University Hospital, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Iksan, Korea
› Author AffiliationsThis article was supported by Wonkwang Institute of Clinical Medicine in 2011
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Background Many topical hemostatics are widely applied for bleeding control. They can be classified into two categories according to their mechanism of action on the clotting cascade in a biologically active or passive manner. Passive hemostatics include cellulose and gelatin. We performed an experimental study to compare the effect of passive hemostatics in wound healing by applying them to a rectus abdominis muscle defect of white mice.

Methods Surgicel is a sterile absorbable knitted fabric prepared by the controlled oxidation of regenerated cellulose. Spongostan is an absorbable hemostatic gelatin sponge. In 30 mice, a 1×1 cm defect was created on the rectus abdominis muscle and the materials were applied in three ways: control group, cellulose (Surgicel) group, gelatin (Spongostan) group. For the histologic analysis, biopsies were performed at 3 and 28 days.

Results After 3 days, the cellulose group showed limited granulation formation with acute inflammatory reactions similar to the control group. At the 28th day, moderate amounts of granulation tissue formation was observed with milder inflammatory reactions than the control group. In the gelatin group, after 3 days, gelatin remnants were observed surrounded by severe inflammatory changes. After 28 days, the same quantity of gelatin remnants could be still observed.

Conclusions This study suggests that cellulose is associated with minimal morbidity in wound healing, while the use of gelatin shows severe adverse tissue reactions with delayed wound healing. Consequently, cellulose is better than gelatin when considering wound healing.

Keywords

Cellulose - Gelatin - Hemostatics - Wound healing

This article was presented at the 1st Research and Reconstructive Forum on May 12-13, 2011 in Deajeon, Korea.




Publication History

Received: 26 April 2012

Accepted: 18 June 2012

Article published online:
01 May 2022

© 2012. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Chvapil M, Owen JA, DeYoung DW. A standardized animal model for evaluation of hemostatic effectiveness of various materials. J Trauma 1983; 23: 1042-1047
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Petersen JK, Krogsgaard J, Nielsen KM. et al. A comparison between 2 absorbable hemostatic agents: gelatin sponge (Spongostan) and oxidized regenerated cellulose (Surgicel). Int J Oral Surg 1984; 13: 406-410
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Wagner WR, Pachence JM, Ristich J. et al. Comparative in vitro analysis of topical hemostatic agents. J Surg Res 1996; 66: 100-108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Jetana T, Vongpipatana C, Usawang S. et al. The use of tropical protein-rich leaves as supplements to Thai swamp buffalo receiving a basal diet of rice straw and treated leucaena (Leucaena leucocephala). Trop Anim Health Prod 2011; 43: 57-67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kang JS. Kang jin-sung plastic surgery. 2004. 3rd ed. Seoul: Gun-ja publication;
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Oz MC, Rondinone JF, Shargill NS. FloSeal Matrix: new generation topical hemostatic sealant. J Card Surg 2003; 18: 486-493
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Tomizawa Y. Clinical benefits and risk analysis of topical hemostats: a review. J Artif Organs 2005; 8: 137-142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Samudrala S. Topical hemostatic agents in surgery: a surgeon's perspective. AORN J 2008; 88: S2-S11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Venn RD. Reduction of postsurgical blood-replacement needs with Surgicel hemostasis. Med Times 1965; 93: 1113-1116
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Blau S, Kanof NB, Simonsen L. Absorbable hemostatic gauze Surgicel® in dermabrasion and dermatologic surgery. Acta Derm Venereol 1960; 40: 358-361
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Dineen P. The effect of oxidized regenerated cellulose on experimental infected splenotomies. J Surg Res 1977; 23: 114-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Spangler D, Rothenburger S, Nguyen K. et al. In vitro antimicrobial activity of oxidized regenerated cellulose against antibiotic-resistant microorganisms. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2003; 4: 255-262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Bing J. Experimental observations on the use of a danish gelatine sponge preparation (〉〉spongostan〈〈) as an absorbable haemostatic agent. Acta Pharmacol Toxicol (Copenh) 1947; 3: 364-372
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Cegielski M, Izykowska I, Podhorska-Okolow M. et al. Development of foreign body giant cells in response to implantation of Spongostan as a scaffold for cartilage tissue engineering. In Vivo 2008; 22: 203-206
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Raghavendra Rao B, Radhakrishna D. Dynamics of cellulase activity during composting of municipal solid waste. Electronic J Environ Agric Food Chem 2008; 7: 3191-3198
    Google Scholar