This article selects 6 original studies published from 2017 to 2024, involving teams from China, Greece, Norway, Israel, and other regions, and presents an application-oriented narrative review. The literature covers materials and in vitro evaluations, animal experiments, and one randomized human study on skin graft donor sites, but does not constitute a comprehensive comparison of all dressing technologies.
01What problems must wound dressings address?
Different wounds have different needs. Burn coverage focuses on restoring barrier function and skin status; diabetes wound studies often examine inflammation, angiogenesis, and re-epithelialization simultaneously; skin graft donor sites require monitoring of irritation, pain, healing, and scarring after coverage. Defining the application scenario before selecting materials can prevent direct extrapolation of results from a single animal model to all wound types.2,3,4,6
| Research scenarios | Functions that the fibrous layer can perform | Factors that require simultaneous attention |
|---|---|---|
| Burns and superficial wounds | Coverage, moisture retention, and natural polymer composites | Moisture exchange, local responses, and skin recovery 3 |
| Diabetes-related wounds | Drug loading, responsive release, and functional layer support | Inflammation, re-epithelialization, vascularization, and tissue reconstruction 4 |
| Skin graft donor site coverage | Formation of a conformal temporary fibrous covering layer | Stimulation, pain, healing time, and subsequent scarring 6 |
For dressing developers, “spinning a layer of fine fibers” is merely the starting point. Whether the membrane is easy to handle, whether it remains intact upon contact with fluid, and whether it requires an absorbent layer or outer support all determine its position within a complete dressing. Independent membranes, fibrous sponges, and hydrogel composite membranes reported in the literature actually correspond to different product-structure issues.1,4,5
02How fibrous membranes are combined with natural polymers and active components
Electrospinning commonly uses fiberr-forming polymers to create a scaffold, followed by the addition of components such as gelatin, silk fibroin, and alginate to adjust the interface. Natural polymers may participate in cell interactions, alter solution properties, affect fluid-responsive behavior, or modify mechanical strength. Therefore, material proportions should be studied together with fiber-forming performance, post-processing, and wet-state use; the final performance cannot be inferred solely from the term “natural.”1,2,3,5
Planar membranes, three-dimensional sponges, and composite layers
Planar fibrous membranes facilitate coverage and formulation screening; assembling fibers into sponges enables investigation of more open three-dimensional environments; adding hydrogels to fibers allows separation of support and local functions. The choice of morphology depends on whether cells are intended to remain on the surface, penetrate into the material interior, or whether the fibrous layer is primarily responsible for coverage.1,4
03Natural polymer research: from skin coverage to local repair environments
Ulvan and gelatin for burn coverage research
In 2022, Terezaki et al. prepared electrospun patches using Ulva polysaccharide ulvan and marine-derived gelatin, among other components, and compared different combinations in a hairless mouse second-degree burn model. In addition to wound area, the study measured transepidermal water loss, hydration status, and histological changes; some formulations showed improved early contraction and inflammation reduction.3
The value of this study lies in linking “material coverage” to skin-barrier recovery while comparing formulations. It supports further investigation of composite approaches for marine polymers, but the results are limited by formulation and model choices and cannot be used to conclude that any ulvan or gelatin fiber will produce the same effects.3
Combining fibrous sponges with endogenous growth factors
In 2017, Li et al. prepared electrospun hydrogel sponges using a polysaccharide EUP3 capable of binding PDGF-BB together with gelatin, aiming to locally enrich growth factors on wounds and release them as the material degrades. Combining in vitro experiments with observations in a mouse full-skin-defect model, the study reported improvements related to angiogenesis and tissue repair.1
This provides a material-based approach distinct from direct addition of exogenous growth factors: modulating the local environment through interactions between the material and endogenous biomolecules. When developing similar samples, binding capacity, release behavior, and final repair outcomes should be verified separately; adsorption tests cannot substitute for animal or human studies.1
04How drug-loaded fibers participate in inflammation and chronic wound research
PLGA, silk fibroin, and artemisinin
Peng et al. in 2021 studied artemisinin-containing PLGA/ silk fibroin electrospun membranes, investigating release profiles, cytocompatibility, and inflammation-related indicators, and observed repair in a rat full-thickness wound model. The results suggest that this composite system can influence the inflammatory process; the significance of the study lies in linking drug release with tissue response.2
Functional division between responsive fibers and conductive hydrogels
In 2022, Cao et al. printed conductive hydrogel strips onto polyurethane fibrous membranes loaded with doxycycline and sensitive to reactive oxygen species. In vitro experiments examined release and cell behavior, while a diabetic rat study further assessed inflammation, collagen formation, vascularization, and re-epithelialization. The combined structure showed reparative effects in this model, demonstrating that electrospun and printed layers can jointly assume different functions.4
Both studies are at the animal-validation stage. They encourage developers to select functions based on specific biological problems rather than continuously stacking active ingredients. As the number of composite layers increases, it becomes increasingly necessary to include individual components and combination controls to identify the sources of observed changes.2,4
05Aqueous-phase and needleless electrospinning: implications for process scale-up
In 2024, Schulte-Werning et al. compared multiple aqueous-phase polymer systems, selected pectin/PEO fibers to encapsulate chloramphenicol-containing liposomes, and employed linear needleless electrospinning. The study examined fiber formation, mechanical properties, liposome integrity, in vitro release, antibacterial activity, and cytocompatibility; liposome incorporation altered the release profile compared with direct drug loading.5
The implication for transitioning from R&D to manufacturing is that solvents and film-forming methods should be considered concurrently with active functions. This paper demonstrates feasibility at the material and in vitro levels; stating that a formulation “is suitable for scale-up discussion” does not mean that product manufacturing validation has been completed. Water-soluble systems still require evaluation of moisture-proof packaging, integrity upon fluid exposure, and batch consistency.5
06What questions have human studies already answered?
In 2022, Haik et al. published a prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label study comparing in situ electrospun coverage with conventional coverage for skin graft donor sites. The two groups comprised 21 and 20 subjects, respectively, and evaluated skin irritation, re-epithelialization, pain, adverse events, and longer-term outcomes such as scarring.6
The report found lower skin-irritation scores on postoperative day 1 in the electrospun group, although the difference did not persist thereafter; mean re-epithelialization times were similar between groups, and no significant differences were observed in several other outcomes. This work provides human feasibility and comparative data for a specific skin-graft-donor-site scenario, while also indicating that evaluation should not focus solely on “faster healing.” It does not validate the aforementioned drug-loaded or diabetic-wound formulations, nor can its findings be generalized to all wounds.6
07From literature protocols to reproducible dressing samples
Define the role of the fibrous layer within the entire dressing
When communicating sample specifications, begin by describing the wound type, whether the membrane contacts the wound directly, whether it is combined with an absorbent substrate, how long it should remain in place, and how it will be removed. Then specify membrane area, thickness or basis weight, mechanical properties, and morphology after fluid exposure, providing comparable targets for fluid supply, collection, and layered configuration.
Combine functional testing with intended-use conditions
In addition to fiber morphology, comparisons may be made according to intended use, including fluid absorption and transport, wet-state strength, release curves, interlayer bonding, and removal behavior. Samples containing drugs, liposomes, or proteins also require verification of active-ingredient integrity after preparation and storage. Material biocompatibility, residues, and sterilization effects should be validated for the specific system; equipment parameters cannot substitute for such evaluations.2,3,4,5
Recheck uniformity after increasing the area
When scaling from small pieces to larger areas, correlate material batches, solution conditions, fluid supply, temperature and humidity, collection speed, and post-processing with test results. For drug-loaded or layered structures, samples should be collected from multiple locations to confirm consistency in content, basis weight, and interlayer bonding.
When reviewing literature formulations, also record the basis used in the paper: whether calculations are based on solution concentration, polymer mass, or entire-membrane mass, as this affects interpretation of drug content. Release percentages must also be linked to sampling time and medium. For the same formulation, fix the sample area and mass first, then compare release and wet-state performance across different structures. Such comparisons more readily identify the factors that truly affect the samples.2,4,5
Evaluation during the R&D phase should also progressively approximate actual operational conditions. For membranes that require trimming, observe whether fibers shed or delaminate after trimming; for membranes intended to conform to curved surfaces, check bending and integrity in a wet state; when planned for use with an absorbent layer, test liquid transfer using the complete laminated structure. These are sample inspection items derived from the intended application and cannot be directly replaced by results from single-layer membrane studies.
08Common issues in wound dressing R&D
Do nanofiber dressings necessarily require antibacterial drugs?
Not necessarily. Existing studies have focused separately on temporary coverage, natural polymer interfaces, enrichment of endogenous factors, and local drug loading. Whether to incorporate drugs should be determined by the intended use and validation results; in vitro antibacterial activity cannot be directly equated with reduced clinical infection rates.1,3,5,6
Can an electrospun layer be directly added to existing nonwoven fabric?
This can be discussed as a sample preparation route, but the respective roles of the substrate, electrospun layer, and bonding method must be clarified. The overall liquid permeability, air permeability, and mechanical performance of the complete dressing must be evaluated after compounding.
How should I begin discussing equipment configuration?
You can begin by providing the material system, solvent, whether drugs are to be loaded, the desired membrane morphology, and sample dimensions. Initially, records can be established based on formulation comparisons and stable membrane formation, followed by discussion of layering, continuous collection, and larger areas.
References
The following are the original studies selected for this article. The literature interpretation does not imply that the paper authors or research institutions have equipment procurement or cooperative relationships with TONGLI; the reported results apply only to the materials, models, and experimental conditions in the original texts.
Bibliographic records retain the original publication language for accurate lookup.
Li Q, et al. In situ sequestration of endogenous PDGF-BB with an ECM-mimetic sponge for accelerated wound healing. Biomaterials. 2017;148:54–68.
DOI：10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.09.028 ↗Scope of review: review of the full text of the original local paper, including relevant methods and results, and verification of the published bibliography
Peng Y, et al. Electrospun PLGA/SF/artemisinin composite nanofibrous membranes for wound dressing. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2021;183:68–78.
DOI：10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2021.04.021 ↗Scope of review: review of the full text of the original local paper, including relevant methods and results, and verification of the published bibliography
Terezaki A, et al. Ulvan/gelatin-based nanofibrous patches as a promising treatment for burn wounds. Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology. 2022;74:103535.
DOI：10.1016/j.jddst.2022.103535 ↗Scope of review: review of the full text of the original local paper, including relevant methods and results, and verification of the published bibliography
Cao W, et al. A nanofibrous membrane loaded with doxycycline and printed with conductive hydrogel strips promotes diabetic wound healing in vivo. Acta Biomaterialia. 2022;152:60–73.
DOI：10.1016/j.actbio.2022.08.048 ↗Scope of review: review of the full text of the original local paper, including relevant methods and results, and verification of the published bibliography
Schulte-Werning LV, et al. Antimicrobial liposomes-in-nanofiber wound dressings prepared by a green and sustainable wire-electrospinning set-up. International Journal of Pharmaceutics. 2024;657:124136.
DOI：10.1016/j.ijpharm.2024.124136 ↗Scope of review: review of the full text of the original local paper, including relevant methods and results, and verification of the published bibliography
Haik J, et al. Advances in the Use of Electrospun Nanofibrous Polymeric Matrix for Dermal Healing at the Donor Site After the Split-Thickness Skin Graft Excision: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Open-Label, Multicenter Study. Journal of Burn Care & Research. 2022;43(4):889–898.
DOI：10.1093/jbcr/irab216 ↗Reading scope: PubMed original abstract and bibliography; full trial report not yet reviewed
The above content is based on analysis and interpretation of publicly published articles. If any infringement is involved, or if the original authors do not wish for the content to be disclosed in this form, please contact us, and we will immediately remove the relevant content.