Development of a reproducible porcine model of infected burn wounds

Authors

  • Sayf Al-deen Said Department of Inflammation & Immunity, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
  • Samreen Jatana Department of Inflammation & Immunity, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
  • Andras K. Ponti Department of Inflammation & Immunity, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
  • Erin E. Johnson Department of Biology, John Carroll University, University Heights, Ohio, USA
  • Kimberly A. Such The Biological Research Unit, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
  • Megan T. Zangara Department of Inflammation & Immunity, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
  • Maria Madajka Department of Plastic Surgery, Dermatology & Plastic Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
  • Francis Papay Department of Plastic Surgery, Dermatology & Plastic Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
  • Christine McDonald Cleveland Clinic

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14440/jbm.2022.379

Keywords:

burn wounds, infection, porcine model, protocol, wound healing

Abstract

Severe burns are traumatic and physically debilitating injuries with a high rate of mortality. Bacterial infections often complicate burn injuries, which presents unique challenges for wound management and improved patient outcomes. Currently, pigs are used as the gold standard of pre-clinical models to study infected skin wounds due to the similarity between porcine and human skin in terms of structure and immunological response. However, utilizing this large animal model for wound infection studies can be technically challenging and create issues with data reproducibility. We present a detailed protocol for a porcine model of infected burn wounds based on our experience in creating and evaluating full thickness burn wounds infected with Staphylococcus aureus on six pigs. Wound healing kinetics and bacterial clearance were measured over a period of 27 d in this model. Enumerated are steps to achieve standardized wound creation, bacterial inoculation, and dressing techniques. Systematic evaluation of wound healing and bacterial colonization of the wound bed is also described. Finally, advice on animal housing considerations, efficient bacterial plating procedures, and overcoming common technical challenges is provided. This protocol aims to provide investigators with a step-by-step guide to execute a technically challenging porcine wound infection model in a reproducible manner. Accordingly, this would allow for the design and evaluation of more effective burn infection therapies leading to better strategies for patient care.

References

Jeschke MG, van Baar ME, Choudhry MA, Chung KK, Gibran NS, Logsetty S. Burn injury. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2020 Feb;6(1):11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-020-0145-5 PMID:32054846

Seaton M, Hocking A, Gibran NS. Porcine models of cutaneous wound healing. ILAR J. 2015;56(1):127–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilv016 PMID:25991704

Moins-Teisserenc H, Cordeiro DJ, Audigier V, Ressaire Q, Benyamina M, Lambert J, et al. Severe Altered Immune Status After Burn Injury Is Associated With Bacterial Infection and Septic Shock. Front Immunol. 2021;12:586195. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2021.586195 PMID: 33737924

Church D, Elsayed S, Reid O, Winston B, Lindsay R. Burn wound infections. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2006;19(2):403-34. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.19.2.403-434.2006 PMID:16614255

Lachiewicz AM, Hauck CG, Weber DJ, Cairns BA, van Duin D. Bacterial Infections After Burn Injuries: Impact of Multidrug Resistance. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;65(12):2130-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cix682 PMID:29194526

Summerfield A, Meurens F, Ricklin ME. The immunology of the porcine skin and its value as a model for human skin. Mol Immunol. 2015 Jul;66(1):14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molimm.2014.10.023 PMID:25466611

Dawson HD, Loveland JE, Pascal G, Gilbert JG, Uenishi H, Mann KM, et al. Structural and functional annotation of the porcine immunome. BMC Genomics. 2013;14:332. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-14-332 PMID:23676093

Singh M, Nuutila K, Minasian R, Kruse C, Eriksson E. Development of a precise experimental burn model. Burns. 2016 Nov;42(7):1507–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2016.02.019 PMID:27450518

Wang XQ, Kempf M, Liu PY, Cuttle L, Chang HE, Kravchuk O, et al. Conservative surgical debridement as a burn treatment: supporting evidence from a porcine burn model. Wound Repair Regen. 2008 Nov-Dec;16(6):774–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2008.00428.x PMID:19128248

Cuttle L, Kempf M, Phillips GE, Mill J, Hayes MT, Fraser JF, et al. A porcine deep dermal partial thickness burn model with hypertrophic scarring. Burns. 2006 Nov;32(7):806–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2006.02.023 PMID:16884856

Jensen LK, Henriksen NL, Jensen HE. Guidelines for porcine models of human bacterial infections. Lab Anim. 2019 Apr;53(2):125–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023677218789444 PMID:30089438

Andrews CJ, Cuttle L. Comparing the reported burn conditions for different severity burns in porcine models: a systematic review. Int Wound J. 2017;14(6):1199-212. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12786 PMID:28736990

Andrews CJ, Kempf M, Kimble R, Cuttle L. Development of a Consistent and Reproducible Porcine Scald Burn Model. PLoS One. 2016;11(9):e0162888. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162888 PMID:27612153

Gibson ALF, Carney BC, Cuttle L, Andrews CJ, Kowalczewski CJ, Liu A, et al. Coming to Consensus: What Defines Deep Partial Thickness Burn Injuries in Porcine Models? J Burn Care Res. 2021;42(1):98-109. https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/iraa132 PMID:32835360

Kempf M, Cuttle L, Liu PY, Wang XQ, Kimble RM. Important improvements to porcine skin burn models, in search of the perfect burn. Burns. 2009 May;35(3):454–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2008.06.013 PMID:18947931

Wardhana A, Lumbuun RFM, Kurniasari D. How to create burn porcine models: a systematic review. Ann Burns Fire Disasters. 2018;31(1):65-72 PMID:30174576

Branski LK, Mittermayr R, Herndon DN, Norbury WB, Masters OE, Hofmann M, et al. A porcine model of full-thickness burn, excision and skin autografting. Burns. 2008;34(8):1119-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2008.03.013 PMID:18617332

Deng X, Chen Q, Qiang L, Chi M, Xie N, Wu Y, et al. Development of a Porcine Full-Thickness Burn Hypertrophic Scar Model and Investigation of the Effects of Shikonin on Hypertrophic Scar Remediation. Front Pharmacol. 2018;9:590. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.00590 PMID:29922164

Jensen LK, Johansen ASB, Jensen HE. Porcine Models of Biofilm Infections with Focus on Pathomorphology. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:1961. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.01961 PMID:29067019

Zurawski DV, Black CC, Alamneh YA, Biggemann L, Banerjee J, Thompson MG, et al. A Porcine Wound Model of Acinetobacter baumannii Infection. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2019;8(1):14-27. https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2018.0786 PMID: 30705786

Gusarov I, Shatalin K, Starodubtseva M, Nudler E. Endogenous nitric oxide protects bacteria against a wide spectrum of antibiotics. Science. 2009;325(5946):1380-4. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1175439 PMID:19745150

Becerra SC, Roy DC, Sanchez CJ, Christy RJ, Burmeister DM. An optimized staining technique for the detection of Gram positive and Gram negative bacteria within tissue. BMC Res Notes. 2016 Apr;9(1):216. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-1902-0 PMID:27071769

Guo HF, Mohd Ali R, Abd Hamid R, Chang SK, Zainal Z, Khaza'ai H. A new histological score grade for deep partial-thickness burn wound healing process. Int J Burns Trauma. 2020;10(5):218-24 PMID:33224609

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health. Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories. 6th Edition, June 2020

Graphical_abstract

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

2022-02-21

How to Cite

1.
Said S, Jatana S, Ponti A, Johnson E, Such K, Zangara M, Madajka M, Papay F, McDonald C. Development of a reproducible porcine model of infected burn wounds. J Biol Methods [Internet]. 2022Feb.21 [cited 2022May27];9(1):e158. Available from: https://jbmethods.org/jbm/article/view/379

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 1 (2022)

Section

Protocols

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Sayf Al-deen Said, Samreen Jatana, Andras K. Ponti, Erin E. Johnson, Kimberly A. Such, Megan T. Zangara, Maria Madajka, Francis Papay, Christine McDonald

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with JBM agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant JBM right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC