Fig. 5: In Vivo study in porcine model for 22 days.
a In vivo experiment schedule and setup. b photo showing the device was mounted on 20 mm wound of the porcine model. c wound stage probability of a treated wound, interpreted by Deep mapper. d Wound healing progress from control and treated wound, interpreted by Deep mapper. e Electric field strength from individual channels of a bioelectronic device. f Fluoxetine delivery rate from individual channels of a bioelectronic device. g Representative images from the day 22 wounds treated with standard of care (control) or the device. h re-epithelialization percentage of control vs treated wound at day 22, collected from Exp2, n = 1. i Epidermal thickness was measured on multiple sites across the neo-epithelium covering the three control wounds and two closed-loop treated wound (ncontrol = 46 technical replicates from 4 samples, ntreated = 32 technical replicates from 4 samples, p = 0.026). j RT- PCR analysis of gene expression from healed wound tissue collected on day 22. Expression of anti-inflammatory IL10 and pro-preparative TGFB1 have elevated in the device-treated wounds relative to the control standard of care (ncontrol = 4, ntreated = 4; IL10 increased by 39%, p = 0.08; IGF1 increased by 39%, p = 0.08; TGFb1 increase 22%, p = 0.21; VEGF increased 21%, p = 0.10). Genes associated with inflammation: IL1B, and TNFa are reduced (IL1b reduced by 61%, p = 0.01; TNF reduced 28%, p = 0.27; IL6 increased by 24%, p = 0.44) k Granulation tissue was identified by difference in histological staining and outlined and area measured. (ncontrol = 3, ntreated = 2, p = 0.047). l Ratio of collagen type III/I, derived from picrosirius red staining under polarized light from healed wounds at day 22. (n = 3, p = 0.237). Bar charts with error bars show the mean ± SD, with individual data points overlaid as dots, p values were calculated using a one-tailed Student’s t-test.
