Discordance between histologic and visual assessment of tissue viability in excised burn wound tissue

The regenerative capacity of burn wounds, and the need for surgical intervention, depends on wound depth. Clinical visual assessment is considered the gold standard for burn depth assessment but it remains a subjective and inaccurate method for tissue evaluation. The purpose of this study was to compare visual assessment with microscopic and molecular techniques for human burn depth determination, and illustrate differences in the evaluation of tissue for potential regenerative capacity. Using intraoperative visual assessment, patients were identified as having deep partial thickness or full thickness burn wounds. Tangential excisions of burn tissue were processed with hematoxylin and eosin to visualize tissue morphology, lactate dehydrogenase assay to ascertain cellular viability, and Keratin‐15 and Ki67 to identify epidermal progenitor cells and proliferative capacity, respectively. RNA from deep partial and full thickness burn tissue as well as normal tissue controls were submitted for RNA sequencing. Lactate dehydrogenase, Keratin‐15, and Ki67 were found throughout the excised burn wound tissue in both deep partial thickness burn tissues and in the second tangential excision of full thickness burn tissues. RNA sequencing demonstrated regenerative capacity in both deep partial and full thickness burn tissue, however a greater capacity for regeneration was present in deep partial thickness compared with full thickness burn tissues. In this study, we highlight the discordance that exists between the intraoperative clinical identification of burn injury depth, and microscopic and molecular determination of viability and regenerative capacity. Current methods utilizing visual assessment for depth of injury are imprecise, and can lead to removal of viable tissue. Additionally, hematoxylin and eosin microscopic analysis should not be used as the sole method in research or clinical determination of depth, as there are no differences in staining between viable and nonviable tissue.

[1]  Z. Janžekovič,et al.  A new concept in the early excision and immediate grafting of burns. , 1970, The Journal of trauma.

[2]  K. Olczyk,et al.  [Wound repair]. , 1998, Postepy higieny i medycyny doswiadczalnej.

[3]  K. Jablonski,et al.  Laser Doppler imaging determines need for excision and grafting in advance of clinical judgment: a prospective blinded trial. , 2003, Burns.

[4]  Jane Q. Nguyen,et al.  Stem cells in the hair follicle bulge contribute to wound repair but not to homeostasis of the epidermis , 2005, Nature Medicine.

[5]  Pablo Tamayo,et al.  Gene set enrichment analysis: A knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[6]  A. Finlay,et al.  Numerous keratinocyte subtypes involved in wound re-epithelialization. , 2006, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[7]  R G Richards,et al.  A comparison of non-radioactive methods for assessing viability in ex vivo cultured cancellous bone: technical note. , 2006, European cells & materials.

[8]  Cole Trapnell,et al.  Ultrafast and memory-efficient alignment of short DNA sequences to the human genome , 2009, Genome Biology.

[9]  K Knobloch,et al.  Differentiation of superficial-partial vs. deep-partial thickness burn injuries in vivo by confocal-laser-scanning microscopy. , 2009, Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries.

[10]  C. Jahoda,et al.  An improved method of human keratinocyte culture from skin explants: cell expansion is linked to markers of activated progenitor cells , 2009, Experimental dermatology.

[11]  Jeffrey W. Shupp,et al.  Critical Review of Burn Depth Assessment Techniques: Part I. Historical Review , 2009, Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association.

[12]  M Tenenhaus,et al.  Cutaneous microcirculatory assessment of the burn wound is associated with depth of injury and predicts healing time. , 2010, Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries.

[13]  Jessica C. Ramella-Roman,et al.  Critical Review of Burn Depth Assessment Techniques: Part II. Review of Laser Doppler Technology , 2010, Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association.

[14]  C. O’Boyle,et al.  Man or Machine? The Clinimetric Properties of Laser Doppler Imaging in Burn Depth Assessment , 2011, Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association.

[15]  Bernard Choi,et al.  Noninvasive assessment of burn wound severity using optical technology: a review of current and future modalities. , 2011, Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries.

[16]  Colin N. Dewey,et al.  RSEM: accurate transcript quantification from RNA-Seq data with or without a reference genome , 2011, BMC Bioinformatics.

[17]  D. Baer,et al.  Debrided Skin as a Source of Autologous Stem Cells for Wound Repair , 2011, Stem cells.

[18]  E. Middelkoop,et al.  Stem Cells in Burn Eschar , 2012, Cell transplantation.

[19]  Ning Leng,et al.  EBSeq: an empirical Bayes hierarchical model for inference in RNA-seq experiments , 2013, Bioinform..

[20]  T. Miyakawa,et al.  Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases , 2013 .

[21]  J. Voorhees,et al.  Eccrine sweat glands are major contributors to reepithelialization of human wounds. , 2013, The American journal of pathology.

[22]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[23]  S. Jabir,et al.  A Systematic Review of the Evolution of Laser Doppler Techniques in Burn Depth Assessment , 2014, Plastic surgery international.

[24]  Pejhman Ghassemi,et al.  Noninvasive imaging technologies for cutaneous wound assessment: A review , 2015, Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society.

[25]  Taryn E. Travis,et al.  Examination of the Early Diagnostic Applicability of Active Dynamic Thermography for Burn Wound Depth Assessment and Concept Analysis , 2015, Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association.

[26]  S. Gnyawali,et al.  Cutaneous Imaging Technologies in Acute Burn and Chronic Wound Care , 2016, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[27]  Jeffrey E. Thatcher,et al.  Multispectral and Photoplethysmography Optical Imaging Techniques Identify Important Tissue Characteristics in an Animal Model of Tangential Burn Excision , 2016, Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association.

[28]  E. Middelkoop,et al.  Long‐term scar quality in burns with three distinct healing potentials: A multicenter prospective cohort study , 2016, Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society.

[29]  Suzanne Polinder,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness of Laser Doppler Imaging in Burn Care in The Netherlands: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 2016, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[30]  D. Bennett,et al.  Improving the histologic characterization of burn depth , 2017, Journal of cutaneous pathology.

[31]  Jacqueline S. Israel,et al.  Variations in Burn Excision and Grafting: A Survey of the American Burn Association , 2017, Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association.

[32]  M. Longaker,et al.  Laboratory Models for the Study of Normal and Pathologic Wound Healing , 2017, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[33]  S. Shatadal,et al.  A simple and improved method to determine cell viability in burn-injured tissue. , 2017, The Journal of surgical research.

[34]  M. Tomic-Canic,et al.  Descriptive vs mechanistic scientific approach to study wound healing and its inhibition: Is there a value of translational research involving human subjects? , 2018, Experimental dermatology.