Functional Genomics Unique to Week 20 Post Wounding in the Deep Cone/Fat Dome of the Duroc/Yorkshire Porcine Model of Fibroproliferative Scarring

Background: Hypertrophic scar was first described over 100 years ago; PubMed has more than 1,000 references on the topic. Nevertheless prevention and treatment remains poor, because 1) there has been no validated animal model; 2) human scar tissue, which is impossible to obtain in a controlled manner, has been the only source for study; 3) tissues typically have been homogenized, mixing cell populations; and 4) gene-by-gene studies are incomplete.Methodology/Principal Findings: We have assembled a system that overcomes these barriers and permits the study of genome-wide gene expression in microanatomical locations, in shallow and deep partial-thickness wounds, and pigmented and non-pigmented skin, using the Duroc( pigmented fibroproliferative)/Yorkshire( non-pigmented non-fibroproliferative) porcine model. We used this system to obtain the differential transcriptome at 1, 2, 3, 12 and 20 weeks post wounding. It is not clear when fibroproliferation begins, but it is fully developed in humans and the Duroc breed at 20 weeks. Therefore we obtained the derivative functional genomics unique to 20 weeks post wounding. We also obtained long-term, forty-six week follow-up with the model.Conclusions/Significance: 1) the scars are still thick at forty-six weeks post wounding further validating the model. 2) the differential transcriptome provides new insights into the fibroproliferative process as several genes thought fundamental to fibroproliferation are absent and others differentially expressed are newly implicated. 3) the findings in the derivative functional genomics support old concepts, which further validates the model, and suggests new avenues for reductionist exploration. in the future, these findings will be searched for directed networks likely involved in cutaneous fibroproliferation. These clues may lead to a better understanding of the systems biology of cutaneous fibroproliferation, and ultimately prevention and treatment of hypertrophic scarring.The National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation ResearchThe National Institutes of HealthThe Washington State Council of Fire Fighters Burn FoundationThe Northwest Burn FoundationUniv Washington, Dept Surg, Div Plast Surg, Seattle, WA 98195 USAIowa State Univ, Dept Anim Sci, Ames, IA USAUniv Washington, Dept Biostat, Seattle, WA 98195 USAMahidol Univ, Ramathibodi Hosp, Dept Surg, Bangkok 10700, ThailandUniv Washington, Dept Environm & Occupat Hlth Sci, Seattle, WA 98195 USAUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Div Plast Surg, Dept Surg, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Div Plast Surg, Dept Surg, São Paulo, BrazilThe National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research: H133G050022The National Institutes of Health: 1R21GM074673The National Institutes of Health: 5U54GM062119-09Web of Scienc

[Fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio for the physiological assessment of coronary artery stenosis in the catheterization laboratory: Practical tips]

In recent years, a large body of evidence has revealed the limitations of angiographic evaluation in determining the physiological significance of coronary stenosis, particularly when these are intermediate lesions. Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) guided by physiological assessment using fractional flow reserve (FFR) have been shown to reduce cardiovascular events when compared to angiography alone. Recently, another coronary physiologic parameter has been introduced: the "instantaneous wave-free ratio" (iFR). In this review, we will discuss the FFR, the iFR, and their use in the functional assessment of coronary stenosis in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. This review will cover theoretical aspects for non-interventional cardiologists, as well as practice points and common pitfalls related to coronary physiological assessment for interventional cardiologists

Comparison of the biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting stent with contemporary drug-eluting stents: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite similar efficacy and safety profile in pilot studies, bioresorbable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) could have potential benefit over latest generation durable polymer (DP)-DES by facilitating vessel healing, therefore reducing inflammation and neoatherosclerosis leading to enhanced clinical safety. Therefore, we sought to perform a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the safety and efficacy of everolimus-eluting BP-DES (BP-EES) to second-generation DP-DES.\nWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the safety and efficacy of BP-EES in patients treated for coronary artery disease. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library through February 2018 for RCTs that included outcome data on BP-EES. We identified four eligible studies, which included a total of 4631 patients. Three studies reported a follow-up of one year and one study of five years. The BP-EES group, included 2315 patients and the DP-DES group included 2316 patients (1143 treated with DP-EES and 1173 treated with zotarolimus eluting DP-DES). Patient's characteristics were comparable between the two groups except for higher prevalence of prior MI in the DP-DES group (25.7 vs 22.5%, respectively, p = 0.001). Procedural characteristics were comparable among groups except for slightly longer lesions in the BP-EES group compared to the DP-DES group (mean 15.1 vs 14.9 mm, p = 0.04). No significant differences were observed for cardiac mortality (p = 0.72), occurrence of MI (p = 0.64), any TLR (p = 0.93), ST (p = 0.85) or major adverse cardiac events (p = 0.43).\nOverall, based on the available data BP-EES had similar one-year outcomes to contemporary DP-DES. Whether these devices could enhance clinical safety remains to be evaluated at longer follow-up

Comparison of the biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting stent with contemporary drug-eluting stents:a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Aims: Despite similar efficacy and safety profile in pilot studies, bioresorbable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) could have potential benefit over latest generation durable polymer (DP)-DES by facilitating vessel healing, therefore reducing inflammation and neoatherosclerosis leading to enhanced clinical safety. Therefore, we sought to perform a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the safety and efficacy of everolimus-eluting BP-DES (BP-EES) to second-generation DP-DES. Methods and results: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the safety and efficacy of BP-EES in patients treated for coronary artery disease. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library through February 2018 for RCTs that included outcome data on BP-EES. We identified four eligible studies, which included a total of 4631 patients. Three studies reported a follow-up of one year and one study of five years. The BP-EES group, included 2315 patients and the DP-DES group included 2316 patients (1143 treated with DP-EES and 1173 treated with zotarolimus eluting DP-DES). Patient’s characteristics were comparable between the two groups except for higher prevalence of prior MI in the DP-DES group (25.7 vs 22.5%, respectively, p = 0.001). Procedural characteristics were comparable among groups except for slightly longer lesions in the BP-EES group compared to the DP-DES group (mean 15.1 vs 14.9 mm, p = 0.04). No significant differences were observed for cardiac mortality (p = 0.72), occurrence of MI (p = 0.64), any TLR (p = 0.93), ST (p = 0.85) or major adverse cardiac events (p = 0.43). Conclusion: Overall, based on the available data BP-EES had similar one-year outcomes to contemporary DP-DES. Whether these devices could enhance clinical safety remains to be evaluated at longer follow-up