Collection of Wound Exudate From Human Digit Tip Amputations Does Not Impair Regenerative Healing: A Randomized Trial

The regrowth of amputated digit tips represents a unique regenerative healing in mammals with subcutaneous volume regrowth, restoration of dactylogram, and suppression of scar formation. Although factor analysis in amphibians and even in mice is easy to obtain, safety of harvesting biomaterial from human digit tip amputations for analysis has not yet been described.The aim of this study was to evaluate if recovering wound exudate does hamper clinical outcome or influence microbiologic or inflammation status.A predefined cohort of 18 patients with fresh digit tip amputations was randomly assigned to receive standard therapy (debridement, occlusive dressing) with (n = 9) or without (n = 9) collection of the whole wound exudate in every dressing change. Primary endpoint (lengthening) and secondary endpoints (regeneration of dactylogram, nail bed and bone healing, time to complete wound closure, scar formation, 2-point discrimination, microbiologic analysis, inflammatory factors interleukin (IL)-1α, tumor necrosis factor-α, IL-4, and IL-6) were determined by an independent, blinded observer.Patients’ characteristics showed no significant differences between the groups. All patients completed the study to the end of 3 months follow-up. Exudate collection did not influence primary and secondary endpoints. Furthermore, positive microbiologic findings as well as pus- and necrosis-like appearance neither impaired tissue restoration nor influenced inflammatory factor release.Here, the authors developed an easy and safe protocol for harvesting wound exudate from human digit tip amputations. For the first time, it was shown that harvesting does not impair regenerative healing. Using this method, further studies can be conducted to analyze regeneration associated factors in the human digit tip.DRKS.de Identifier: DRKS00006882 (UTN: U1111-1166-5723).     

Current therapeutical strategies for allergic rhinitis

Introduction: Allergic rhinitis is a common condition with increasing prevalence and is associated with several comorbid disorders such as bronchial asthma and atopic dermatitis. If allergen avoidance is not possible, allergen-specific immunotherapy is the only causal treatment option.

Areas covered: This review focuses on current treatments and the future outlook for allergic rhinitis. Pharmacotherapy includes mast cell stabilizers, antihistamines, glucocorticosteroids (GCSs), leukotriene receptor antagonists, and nasal decongestants. Nasal GCSs are currently regarded as the most effective treatment and are considered first-line therapy together with non-sedating antihistamines. The new formulation MP29-02 combines the nasal GCS fluticasone propionate with azelastine in one single spray and has achieved greater improvements than those under monotherapy with modern GCSs or antihistamines. Furthermore, this review discusses allergen immunotherapy alone and in combination with modern monoclonal antibodies.

Expert opinion: Despite the variety of medications for allergic rhinitis, ranging from general symptomatic agents like GCSs or decongestants, to more specific ones like histamine receptor or leukotriene blockers, to causal therapy like immunotherapy, many patients still experience treatment failures or unsatisfactory results. The ultimate goal may be to endotype every downstream pathway separately in order to offer patients individualized, targeted therapy with specific antibodies against the respective pathway.