Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2007;30(2):107-16.
doi: 10.1080/10790268.2007.11753921.

Animal models in pressure ulcer research

Affiliations
Review

Animal models in pressure ulcer research

Richard Salcido et al. J Spinal Cord Med. 2007.

Abstract

Background/objective: Research targeting the pathophysiology, prevention, and treatment of pressure ulcers (PrUs) continue to be a significant priority for clinical and basic science research. Spinal cord injury patients particularly benefit from PrU research, because the prevalence of chronic wounds in this category is increasing despite standardized medical care. Because of practical, ethical, and safety considerations, PrUs in the human environment are limited to studies involving patients with pre-existing ulcers. Therefore, we are limited in our basic knowledge pertaining to the development, progression, and healing environment in this devastating disease.

Methods: This review provides a synopsis of literature and a discussion of techniques used to induce PrUs in animal models. The question of what animal model best mimics the human PrU environment has been a subject of debate by investigators, peer review panels, and editors. The similarities in wound development and healing in mammalian tissue make murine models a relevant model for understanding the causal factors as well as the wound healing elements. Although we are beginning to understand some of the mechanisms of PrU development, a key dilemma of what makes an apparently healthy tissue develop a PrU waits to be solved.

Results and conclusions: No single method of induction and exploring PrUs in animals can address all the aspects of the pathology of chronic wounds. Each model has its particular strengths and weaknesses. Certain types of models can selectively identify specific aspects of wound development, quantify the extent of lesions, and assess outcomes from interventions. The appropriate interpretation of these methods is significant for proper study design, an understanding of the results, and extrapolation to clinical relevance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kosiak M, Kubicek WG, Olson M, Danz JN, Kottke FJ. Evaluation of pressure as a factor in the production of ischial ulcers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1958;39(10):623–629. - PubMed
    1. Kosiak M. Etiology and pathology of ischemic ulcers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1959;40(2):62–69. - PubMed
    1. Chen Y, DeVivo MJ, Jackson AB. Pressure ulcer prevalence in people with spinal cord injury: age-period-duration effects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(6):1208–1213. - PubMed
    1. Fuhrer MJ, Garber SL, Rintala DH, Clearman R, Hart KA. Pressure ulcers in community-resident persons with spinal cord injury: prevalence and risk factors. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74(11):1172–1177. - PubMed
    1. Byrne DW, Salzberg CA. Major risk factors for pressure ulcers in the spinal cord disabled: a literature review. Spinal Cord. 1996;34(5):255–263. - PubMed

MeSH terms