Effects of a Cross-linked Hyaluronic Acid Based Gel on the Healing of Open Wounds in Dogs

Authors

  • Heather S. Hadley DVM,

    1. Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Bryden J. Stanley BVMS, MVetSc, Diplomate ACVS,

    Corresponding author
    • Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Michele C. Fritz BS, LVT,

    1. Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Joe G. Hauptman DVM, MS, Diplomate ACVS,

    1. Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Barbara A. Steficek DVM, PhD, Diplomate ACVP

    1. Diagnostic Center for Population and Animal Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
    Search for more papers by this author

  • Funded by the Companion Animal Health Foundation, Michigan State University.

  • Presented in part at the ACVS Symposium, Seattle, WA, October 20–23, 2010.

Corresponding Author

Bryden J. Stanley, BVMS, MVetSc, Diplomate ACVS, Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824

E-mail: stanle32@cvm.msu.edu

Abstract

Objective

To compare effects of a cross-linked hyaluronic acid (HA) based gel (CMHA-S) to a standard wound management protocol on the healing of acute, full-thickness wounds in dogs.

Study Design

A prospective, controlled, experimental study.

Animals

Purpose-bred, adult, female beagles (n = 10).

Methods

Two 2 × 2 cm wounds were surgically created bilaterally on the trunk of each dog and each side randomized to treatment (CMHA-S) or control (CON) groups. Total and open wound areas were measured with digital image planimetry at 15 time points. From these data, percent contraction and percent epithelialization were calculated. Tissue biopsies were obtained at 6 time points and histologic features were scored.

Results

Total wound area was significantly larger and percent contraction was significantly less in CMHA-S compared to CON wounds at all data points between days 9 and 18. At day 25, and for the remainder of the study, CMHA-S wounds were smaller and contracted more than CON wounds, reaching significance at day 32. Percent epithelialization was significantly less in CMHA-S compared to CON wounds at all data points after day 11. Histologically, fibroblastic cellular infiltration was significantly higher in CMHA-S wounds at day 21.

Conclusions

CMHA-S wounds healed more slowly than CON wounds. This HA-based gel is not indicated in acute, full-thickness skin wounds in dogs as administered in this study. However, treatment may be beneficial in the mid-to-late repair stage of healing, or if scar minimization is desired. Further studies to evaluate the effects of the CMHA-S gel on canine wounds are indicated.

Ancillary