Bioengineered Skin & Skin Substitutes in Wound Care

Bioengineered skin was developed because of the need to cover extensive burn injuries in patients who no longer had enough skin for grafting. Not so long ago, a patient with third degree burns over 50% of his body surface usually died from his injuries. That is no longer the case. Today, even someone with 90% TBSA has a good chance of surviving. With the array of bioengineered skin and skin substitutes available today, such products are also finding use for chronic wounds, in order to prevent infection, speed healing and provide improved cosmetic results.

Apligraf, Organogenesis

Skin used in wound care may be autograft (from the patient’s own body, as is often the case with burn patients), allograft (cadaver skin), xenogeneic (from animals such as pigs or cows), or a combination of these. Bioengineered skin substitutes are synthetic, although they, too, may be combined with other products. It consists of an outer epidermal layer and (depending on the product) a dermal layer, which are embedded into an acellular support matrix. This product may be autogenic, or from other sources. Currently most commercial bioengineered skin is sheets of cells derived from neonatal allogenic foreskin. This source is chosen for several reasons: because the cells come from healthy newborns undergoing circumcision, and therefore the tissue would have been discarded anyway; foreskin tissue is high in epidermal keratinocyte stem cells, which grow vigorously; and because allergic reactions to this tissue is uncommon.

Selected Bioengineered Skin & Skin Substitutes

Source MedMarket Diligence, LLC; Report #S251.

Author

PatrickDriscoll

I serve the interests of medical technology company decision-makers, venture-capitalists, and others with interests in medtech producing worldwide analyses of medical technology markets for my audience of mostly medical technology companies (but also rapidly growing audience of biotech, VC, and other healthcare decision-makers). I have a small staff and go to my industry insiders (or find new ones as needed) to produce detailed, reality-grounded analyses of current and potential markets and opportunities. I am principally interested in those core clinical applications served by medical devices, which are expanding to include biomaterials, drug-device hybrids and other non-device technologies either competing head-on with devices or being integrated with devices in product development. The effort and pain of making every analysis global in scope is rewarded by my audience's loyalty, since in the vast majority of cases they too have global scope in their businesses.Specialties: Business analysis through syndicated reports, and select custom engagements, on medical technology applications and markets in general/abdominal/thoracic surgery, interventional cardiology, cardiothoracic surgery, patient monitoring/management, wound management, cell therapy, tissue engineering, gene therapy, nanotechnology, and others.

View all posts by PatrickDriscoll