A. I. Dovhaliuk¹, O. I. Kulianda², N. V. Ohinska¹, O. S. Redko¹,
O. O. Kulianda³, A. O. Kovalchuk⁴, V. V. Kulbitska1, S. B. Kramar¹,
Z. M. Nebesna¹, M. M. Korda2, O. O. Shevchuk⁵*

¹Department of Histology and Embryology, Ivan Horbachevsky Ternopil National Medical University, Ternopil, Ukraine;
²Department of Medical Biochemistry, Ivan Horbachevsky Ternopil
National Medical University, Ternopil, Ukraine;
³Department of Pathophysiology, Ivan Horbachevsky Ternopil
National Medical University, Ternopil, Ukraine;
⁴Central Research Laboratory, Ivan Horbachevsky Ternopil
National Medical University, Ternopil, Ukraine;
⁵Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacology,
Ivan Horbachevsky Ternopil National Medical University, Ternopil, Ukraine;
*e-mail: shevchukoo@tdmu.edu.ua

Received: 27 May 2026; Revised: 19 June 2026;
Accepted: 27 July 2026; Available on-line: August 2026

Background. Chronic wounds pose a serious clinical and economic burden, and their effective treatment requires the development of new biomaterials that promote tissue regeneration. Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) represent a promising regenerative strategy; however, their biological properties largely depend on the manu­facturing protocol. Objective. To compare the biocompatibility and cytotoxicity of two porcine acellular dermal matrix variants, dry (d-ADM) and wet (w-ADM), and to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of the biocompatible matrix in an experimental porcine model of chronic full-thickness wounds. Methods. Biocompatibility was assessed in vitro using human umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hU-MSCs) by evaluating cell morphology, viability, proliferation, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release. The therapeutic efficacy of the selected ADM was investigated in a porcine chronic full-thickness excisional wound model and compared with non-adhesive dressings and Promogran Prisma. Wound healing was evaluated after 28 days using histological, immunohistochemical (TNF-α, TGF-β, Ki-67), and morphometric analyses. Results. The wet ADM preserved hU-MSC morphology, viability, and proliferative capacity, whereas the dry ADM induced marked cytotoxicity, increased LDH release, and extensive cell death. In vivo, treatment with w-ADM significantly accelerated wound healing compared with both control dressings, resulting in complete and stable re-epithelialization, minimal inflammatory infiltration, organized collagen remodeling, and improved tissue architecture. Immunohistochemical analysis demonstrated significantly lower expression of TNF-α, TGF-β, and Ki-67, indicating resolution of inflammation and transition toward tissue remodeling and regene­rative stabilization. Conclusions. Wet acellular dermal matrix demonstrated excellent biocompatibility and superior regenerative performance, whereas the dry matrix exhibited unacceptable cytotoxicity. Wet ADM represents a promising scaffold for regenerative treatment of chronic wounds and warrants further investigation as a clinically applicable biomaterial, including in combination with mesenchymal stem cell-based therapies.