Current Status, Challenges, and Prospects of Artificial Intelligence Applications in Wound Repair Theranostics

Overview

Journal Theranostics

Date 2025 Feb 3

PMID 39897550

Authors

Huazhen Liu

Wenbin Sun

Weihuang Cai

Kaidi Luo

Chunxiang Lu

Aoxiang Jin

Jiantao Zhang

Yuanyuan Liu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Skin injuries caused by physical, pathological, and chemical factors not only compromise appearance and barrier function but can also lead to life-threatening microbial infections, posing significant challenges for patients and healthcare systems. Artificial intelligence (AI) technology has demonstrated substantial advantages in processing and analyzing image information. Recently, AI-based methods and algorithms, including machine learning, deep learning, and neural networks, have been extensively explored in wound care and research, providing effective clinical decision support for wound diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and rehabilitation. However, challenges remain in achieving a closed-loop care system for the comprehensive application of AI in wound management, encompassing wound diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment. This review comprehensively summarizes recent advancements in AI applications in wound repair. Specifically, it discusses AI's role in injury type classification, wound measurement (including area and depth), wound tissue type classification, wound monitoring and prediction, and personalized treatment. Additionally, the review addresses the challenges and limitations AI faces in wound management. Finally, recommendations for the application of AI in wound repair are proposed, along with an outlook on future research directions, aiming to provide scientific evidence and technological support for further advancements in AI-driven wound repair theranostics.

References

Wang Z, Liang X, Wang G, Wang X, Chen Y . Emerging Bioprinting for Wound Healing. Adv Mater. 2023; :e2304738. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202304738. View

Lahat A, Sharif K, Zoabi N, Patt Y, Sharif Y, Fisher L . Assessing Generative Pretrained Transformers (GPT) in Clinical Decision-Making: Comparative Analysis of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26:e54571. PMC: 11240076. DOI: 10.2196/54571. View

Hakimi N, Cheng R, Leng L, Sotoudehfar M, Ba P, Bakhtyar N . Handheld skin printer: in situ formation of planar biomaterials and tissues. Lab Chip. 2018; 18(10):1440-1451. PMC: 5965293. DOI: 10.1039/c7lc01236e. View

Zhao K, Jiang B, Zhang S, Zhang L, Zhang L, Feng Y . Measurement Accuracy and Repeatability of RECIST-Defined Pulmonary Lesions and Lymph Nodes in Ultra-Low-Dose CT Based on Deep Learning Image Reconstruction. Cancers (Basel). 2022; 14(20). PMC: 9599467. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14205016. View

Flanagan M . Wound measurement: can it help us to monitor progression to healing?. J Wound Care. 2003; 12(5):189-94. DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2003.12.5.26493. View

Alonso M, Mohammed H, Fraser R, Ramirez Garcia Luna J, Mannion D . Comparison of wound surface area measurements obtained using clinically validated artificial intelligence-based technology versus manual methods and the effect of measurement method on debridement code reimbursement cost. Wounds. 2023; 35(10):E330-E338. View

Rodeheaver G, Stotts N . Methods for assessing change in pressure ulcer status. Adv Wound Care. 1995; 8(4):suppl 34-6. View

Wang M, Luo Y, Wang T, Wan C, Pan L, Pan S . Artificial Skin Perception. Adv Mater. 2020; 33(19):e2003014. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202003014. View

Veredas F, Mesa H, Morente L . Binary tissue classification on wound images with neural networks and bayesian classifiers. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2009; 29(2):410-27. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2009.2033595. View

10.

Queen D . Could wound care benefit from the artificial intelligence storm taking place worldwide. Int Wound J. 2023; 20(5):1337-1338. PMC: 10088830. DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14171. View

11.

Filko D, Marijanovic D, Nyarko E . Automatic Robot-Driven 3D Reconstruction System for Chronic Wounds. Sensors (Basel). 2021; 21(24). PMC: 8703929. DOI: 10.3390/s21248308. View

12.

Goldberg H, Klaff J, Spjut A, Milner S . A mobile app for measuring the surface area of a burn in three dimensions: comparison to the Lund and Browder assessment. J Burn Care Res. 2014; 35(6):480-3. DOI: 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000037. View

13.

Howell R, Liu H, Khan A, Woods J, Lin L, Saxena M . Development of a Method for Clinical Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence-Based Digital Wound Assessment Tools. JAMA Netw Open. 2021; 4(5):e217234. PMC: 8134996. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.7234. View

14.

Wang C, Yan X, Smith M, Kochhar K, Rubin M, Warren S . A unified framework for automatic wound segmentation and analysis with deep convolutional neural networks. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2016; 2015:2415-8. DOI: 10.1109/EMBC.2015.7318881. View

15.

Li F, Wang C, Liu X, Peng Y, Jin S . A Composite Model of Wound Segmentation Based on Traditional Methods and Deep Neural Networks. Comput Intell Neurosci. 2018; 2018:4149103. PMC: 6000917. DOI: 10.1155/2018/4149103. View

16.

Eming S, Martin P, Tomic-Canic M . Wound repair and regeneration: mechanisms, signaling, and translation. Sci Transl Med. 2014; 6(265):265sr6. PMC: 4973620. DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3009337. View

17.

Liu H, Yue K, Cheng S, Li W, Fu Z . A Framework for Automatic Burn Image Segmentation and Burn Depth Diagnosis Using Deep Learning. Comput Math Methods Med. 2021; 2021:5514224. PMC: 8046560. DOI: 10.1155/2021/5514224. View

18.

Serrano C, Boloix-Tortosa R, Gomez-Cia T, Acha B . Features identification for automatic burn classification. Burns. 2015; 41(8):1883-1890. DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2015.05.011. View

19.

Anderson C, Bekele Z, Qiu Y, Tschannen D, Dinov I . Modeling and prediction of pressure injury in hospitalized patients using artificial intelligence. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021; 21(1):253. PMC: 8406893. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-021-01608-5. View

20.

Ahuja A . The impact of artificial intelligence in medicine on the future role of the physician. PeerJ. 2019; 7:e7702. PMC: 6779111. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7702. View