Electric Potential Across Epidermis and Its Role During Wound Healing Can Be Studied by Using an <i>In Vitro</i> Reconstructed Human Skin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: After human epidermis wounding, transepithelial potential (TEP) present in nonlesional epidermis decreases and induces an endogenous direct current epithelial electric field (EEF) that could be implicated in the wound re-epithelialization. Some studies suggest that exogenous electric stimulation of wounds can stimulate healing, although the mechanisms remain to be determined. The Problem: Little is known concerning the exact action of the EEF during healing. The mechanism responsible for TEP and EEF is unknown due to the lack of an in vitro model to study this phenomenon. Basic Science Advances: We carried out studies by using a wound created in a human tissue-engineered skin and determined that TEP undergoes ascending and decreasing phases during the epithelium formation. The in vitro TEP measurements over time in the wound were corroborated with histological changes and with in vivo TEP variations during porcine skin wound healing. The expression of a crucial element implicated in Na+ transport, Na+/K+ ATPase pumps, was also evaluated at the same time points during the re-epithelialization process. The ascending and decreasing TEP values were correlated with changes in the expression of these pumps. The distribution of Na+/K+ ATPase pumps also varied according to epidermal differentiation. Further, inhibition of the pump activity induced a significant decrease of the TEP and of the re-epithelization rate. Clinical Care Relevance: A better comprehension of the role of EEF could have important future medical applications regarding the treatment of chronic wound healing. Conclusion: This study brings a new perspective to understand the formation and restoration of TEP during the cutaneous wound healing process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".