Jump to content

Photo

Scarless Healing


5755 replies to this topic

#5741 rudy1986

rudy1986

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 23
    Likes: 0
About Me
  • Joined: 17-December 14

Posted 21 January 2015 - 09:44 PM

Please correct my logic here :

1.They said that they recently completed porcine study, meaning it was already successful in pigs...

2.But they also said that they are currently engaging in pigs AGAIN but this time with acute wounds


Whats the difference between point 1 and 2? I see no difference really..

Can anyone help me ? They finished pig test wasnt it?

#5742 rudy1986

rudy1986

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 23
    Likes: 0
About Me
  • Joined: 17-December 14

Posted 21 January 2015 - 10:40 PM

Also what is this ambigous word they are using :

Mid-to-late 2016 means :
1. Start mid 2016 end late 2016
2. Start could be mid 2016 or late 2016, while the end still unknown

Which one is it?

#5743 bloodwar44

bloodwar44

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 77
    Likes: 8
About Me
  • Joined: 24-June 14

Posted 22 January 2015 - 11:22 AM

Rudy your scars are like the scars



#5744 golfpanther

golfpanther

    Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 172
    Likes: 64
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 04-May 11

Posted 23 January 2015 - 02:48 PM

Also what is this ambigous word they are using :

Mid-to-late 2016 means :
1. Start mid 2016 end late 2016
2. Start could be mid 2016 or late 2016, while the end still unknown

Which one is it?

 

Well, I don't think any of us know the answer to that. However, it's doubtful that they'd finish within six months of starting the trials given their track record and how long trials typically take. I'd lean more toward option 2 withe trials wrapping up sometime in 2017 or 2018, but I don't know for sure.

 

In regards to your questions about the tests on pigs and why they've started up one for acute wounds—if you read on their site they explain that the new trials are for immunodeficiencies that would prevent even the normal scar response from taking place (hence, acute wounds). As another poster pointed out, if they can solve that riddle as well by adding stem cells and growth factors that grant someone the ability to heal it would mean a HUGE financial windfall. This is, at least in part, about making money after all. A person with immunodeficiencies doesn't have the same response to injury as someone without them so it's likely things will need to be added to get the same outcome as the dextran hydrogel alone for people whose bodies respond to injury in a non-compromised way.



#5745 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 58
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted 26 January 2015 - 05:48 PM

Bad news, the hydrogel failed on pigs.



#5746 rudy1986

rudy1986

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 23
    Likes: 0
About Me
  • Joined: 17-December 14

Posted 26 January 2015 - 07:37 PM

How do you know this?

#5747 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 58
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted 27 January 2015 - 04:49 AM

https://jscholarship...le/1774.2/37108

In the link you can find a PDF doc, the hydrogel was degraded by the body "pigs" in five days only, so the scaffold was too soft. Probably the hydrogel needs some adjustings to be more consistent.

#5748 rudy1986

rudy1986

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 23
    Likes: 0
About Me
  • Joined: 17-December 14

Posted 27 January 2015 - 05:44 AM

So this dextran hydrogel is no longer running then repola?

What should we put our hope on then? any ideas guys?

#5749 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 58
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted 27 January 2015 - 06:39 AM

The hydrogel has the potential for skin regeneration but pigs and mice degrade the hydrogel at different rate. Mice 21days, pigs 5days, I am not scientist but the hydrogel properties can be adjusted to degrade at slower rate in pigs, around 21days, this is essential for skin regeneration.

#5750 rudy1986

rudy1986

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 23
    Likes: 0
About Me
  • Joined: 17-December 14

Posted 27 January 2015 - 07:43 AM

i see thx for the info repola

Judging by the timeline , the pdf was published around april or may 2014.... while the website was established at nov 2014 while still stating that they aim for scar free wound healing.. though maybe like i said earlier, it could not meet the timeframe in 2017 or 2018 but longer for FDA approval...

Also the hydrogel degrade faster pigs and blood vessel was observed around the edge..

Before reaching to the center of the wound, the hydrogel was completely digested, so it continues healing like it was before hydrogel being applied, hence normal healing continues?
any thoughts guys?

#5751 bloodwar44

bloodwar44

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 77
    Likes: 8
About Me
  • Joined: 24-June 14

Posted 27 January 2015 - 08:38 AM

the pig failure is why they pushed the time to late 2016

 



#5752 Bozo

Bozo

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 15
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 09-April 14

Posted 27 January 2015 - 11:08 PM

Just curious, where does it say that the hydrogel was degraded after 21 days in mice? The only thing I can find on the matter seems to indicate that the hydrogel only took about 7 days to completely digest in mice.

 

With further adjustments to the hydrogel, it will hopefully produce the same results in pigs and ultimately humans that it did in mice. The sheer fact that complete regeneration of skin was provoked in a mammal is unprecedented in and of itself.


Edited by Bozo, Yesterday, 01:48 AM.


#5753 rudy1986

rudy1986

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 23
    Likes: 0
About Me
  • Joined: 17-December 14

Posted Yesterday, 12:12 AM

Thats what i was saying in my last post about it degrade fast meaning it is indeed positive

#5754 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 58
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted Yesterday, 08:04 AM

You are right it was digested in 7days in mice and in 5days in pigs, the 21days is for the hair grow and glands in mice.

I think degradation rate should be in time, not too fast not too slow.

#5755 rudy1986

rudy1986

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 23
    Likes: 0
About Me
  • Joined: 17-December 14

Posted Yesterday, 08:44 AM

seabs135, you usually answers with logic.. what do you think about this man?

#5756 skinregenerator

skinregenerator

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 72
    Likes: 4
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 09-August 12

Posted Today, 08:44 AM

the mice experiment is a completely failed...far from the originally published data on PNAS


Edited by skinregenerator, Today, 11:49 AM.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users