$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Traumatic wound healing takes approximately 21 days and has a well-defined sequence of four distinct phases: (1) hemostasis, (2) inflammation, (3) proliferation, and (4) remodelling1. If any phase of wound healing is prolonged, it can lead to the development of chronic wounds1. Due to their high prevalence, potential complications2, and significant economic burden, they are considered a global health problem.
Pre-clinical studies aim to achieve faster healing by promoting comprehensive wound re-epithelialization3,4,5, preventing complications, and reducing treatment costs. These studies evaluate various strategies, including the development of biomaterials, pharmacological interventions, and other regenerative medicine procedures6,7,8,9.
Multiple experimental models have been developed for the study of traumatic wounds. Some focus on macroscopically visible qualitative characteristics such as size, inflammation indicators, presence of granulation tissue, secretions, and scab formation5. Others analyze quantitative data, including area, perimeter, radius, diameter, color, depth, and distances from the center to the edges of wounds.
In this regard, most in vivo investigations directly measure wound radius and depth. However, manual delineation of wound edges in a macroscopic image can introduce biases in the measurement10. Other studies use mechanical planimetry, using transparent gridded plastic sheets, where the wound edges are previously delineated; in both cases, obtaining the area or perimeter requires manual instruments such as rulers or digital planimeters. Nowadays, computer-assisted digital planimetry allows computerized analysis of macroscopic images of wounds or plastic sheets. In situ manipulation and quality of macroscopic image are a limitation, however, this tool11,12,13,14 considerably reduces the variability between area and perimeter measurements.
This proposed methodology offers significant advantages over existing techniques for evaluating wound closure in mice15,16,17,18,19,20. While photo documentation has been considered an accurate and consistent tool for assessing wound closure kinetics, previous studies21,22 have highlighted the limitations of manual wound measurement, such as observer bias and variability due to inconsistent lighting and camera positioning. The current approach addresses these issues by standardizing imaging conditions through a custom-built booth, improving reproducibility and precision. Furthermore, computerized digital planimetry enables more accurate quantitative assessments, enhancing the evaluation of therapeutic interventions and minimizing measurement errors, as evidenced in other studies comparing manual and digital techniques12,22 making it particularly suited for studies of wound closure kinetics in murine models, allowing precise evaluation of treatments by maintaining strict control over image acquisition conditions.