Next Article in Journal
Environment-Driven Synthetic Baseline Analysis and Optimization in Joint Measurement OPM-MEG Arrays
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Flat-Side Design on Torsional and Bending Stress of Nickel–Titanium File by Finite Element Analysis
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Review

Experimental Burn Induction in Laboratory Animals: A Scoping Review of Methods, Reproducibility, Operator-Dependent Variability, and Relevance to Soft Tissue Reconstruction and Repair

by
Antonios Kyriakopoulos
1,*,
Michalis Katsimpoulas
2,
Vasilios Kyriakopoulos
3,
Evangelos Felekouras
4,
Stratigoula Sakellariou
5,
Ioannis Kouris
6 and
Alexandros Charalabopoulos
4
1
Plastic Surgery Department, Evaggelismos General Hospital of Athens, 10676 Athens, Greece
2
Experimental Surgery, Regenerative Medicine Preclinical Research, Experimental Surgical Unit, Center of Clinical, Experimental Surgery and Translational Research, Biomedical Research Foundation of the Academy of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece
3
Physiotherapy Department, Athens Technological Educational Institute, University of West Attica, 12243 Athens, Greece
4
1st Surgical Department, Laiko Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece
5
1st Department of Pathology, Medical School, Laiko Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece
6
Iodine Therapy Department, General Oncological Hospital of Kifisia “Oi Agioi Anargyroi”, 14564 Athens, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Bioengineering 2026, 13(6), 601; https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering13060601
Submission received: 19 April 2026 / Revised: 14 May 2026 / Accepted: 18 May 2026 / Published: 22 May 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Soft Tissue Reconstruction and Repair)

Abstract

Background: Experimental animal models remain central to burn research and soft-tissue reconstruction/repair, but method heterogeneity compromises reproducibility, comparability, and translation for depth/area endpoints. Objective: We aimed to map burn-induction methods and examine reproducibility, intentional depth modulation, wound-area stability, validation, and operator-dependent variability. Methods: A PRISMA-ScR review, informed by JBI guidance, was conducted without registration but with predefined questions, criteria, and charting domains. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to 30 January 2026. Eligible studies were English peer-reviewed full-text original in vivo animal studies. Two reviewers independently screened records; one charted data, another checked it. Evidence was mapped by modality, exposure-control architecture, validation, and operator-sensitive steps. Results: Studies varied by species, modality, device design, exposure settings, and severity verification. Modalities were contact, scald, steam, and radiant/infrared. Wound area was more reproducible than depth, which depended on temperature, duration, force/pressure, geometry, equilibration, anatomical site, and assessment timing. Histopathology was the main standard, sometimes complemented by morphometry, optical, or perfusion techniques. Operator-sensitive variability involved force, alignment, contact stability, template integrity, exposure geometry, source stability/environmental control. Conclusions: Burn induction is a measurement-system problem; constraining operator-sensitive variables, predefined validation timing, and quantitative variability reporting may improve validity, comparability, and translation.
Keywords: burn injury; animal models; experimental burns; reproducibility; repeatability; operator-dependent variability; burn depth; scoping review; wound healing; thermal injury burn injury; animal models; experimental burns; reproducibility; repeatability; operator-dependent variability; burn depth; scoping review; wound healing; thermal injury

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kyriakopoulos, A.; Katsimpoulas, M.; Kyriakopoulos, V.; Felekouras, E.; Sakellariou, S.; Kouris, I.; Charalabopoulos, A. Experimental Burn Induction in Laboratory Animals: A Scoping Review of Methods, Reproducibility, Operator-Dependent Variability, and Relevance to Soft Tissue Reconstruction and Repair. Bioengineering 2026, 13, 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering13060601

AMA Style

Kyriakopoulos A, Katsimpoulas M, Kyriakopoulos V, Felekouras E, Sakellariou S, Kouris I, Charalabopoulos A. Experimental Burn Induction in Laboratory Animals: A Scoping Review of Methods, Reproducibility, Operator-Dependent Variability, and Relevance to Soft Tissue Reconstruction and Repair. Bioengineering. 2026; 13(6):601. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering13060601

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kyriakopoulos, Antonios, Michalis Katsimpoulas, Vasilios Kyriakopoulos, Evangelos Felekouras, Stratigoula Sakellariou, Ioannis Kouris, and Alexandros Charalabopoulos. 2026. "Experimental Burn Induction in Laboratory Animals: A Scoping Review of Methods, Reproducibility, Operator-Dependent Variability, and Relevance to Soft Tissue Reconstruction and Repair" Bioengineering 13, no. 6: 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering13060601

APA Style

Kyriakopoulos, A., Katsimpoulas, M., Kyriakopoulos, V., Felekouras, E., Sakellariou, S., Kouris, I., & Charalabopoulos, A. (2026). Experimental Burn Induction in Laboratory Animals: A Scoping Review of Methods, Reproducibility, Operator-Dependent Variability, and Relevance to Soft Tissue Reconstruction and Repair. Bioengineering, 13(6), 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering13060601

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop