AI Summary & Key Takeaways
AI InsightLiteraturereview revealed a signiŞcant variability in previous studies in terms of the amount of necrosis observedin tail degloving injury model.Conclusion: Tail degloving injury model proved to be a more reliable animal model for degloving injuries.However, standardization of the magnitude of degloving force is required to decrease the variability ofnecrosis observed in the literature.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
Abstract
Objective: Two different rat models for degloving injury were described in the literature. Our aim in thisstudy is to compare these rat models to determine which one is more reliable and reproducible.Methods: We surgically induced degloving injury on tails and left hindlimbs of Wistar albino rats (n¼ 8),and sutured the avulsed tissues back in their original positions after a waiting period. We observed thechanges in the avulsedflaps every other day for 10 days. At the end of follow-up period we evaluated thelesions in avulsedflaps by macroscopic measurement of necrosis and histological ulcer scoring using theNational Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) Scale.Results: The average length of necrosis in avulsed tailflaps was 28.42 ± 3.04 mm, whereas there was nonecrosis in avulsed hindlimbhindlimb were 3.42± 0.78, and 1.28 ± 0.48, respectively (p < 0.05). Despite the lack of visible necrosisTUNEL staining revealed an increased amount of apoptotic cells in avulsed hindlimbflaps. Literaturereview revealed a signiŞcant variability in previous studies in terms of the amount of necrosis observedin tail degloving injury model.Conclusion: Tail degloving injury model proved to be a more reliable animal model for degloving injuries.However, standardization of the magnitude of degloving force is required to decrease the variability ofnecrosis observed in the literature.