**4. Clinical advantages of animal models in burn research**

In clinical purposes, animal research models should be determined by maximizing their translational relevance to humans. Besides that each animal model has the unique strengths and limitations (summarized in **Table 1**), its most important value is the capability to represent the nature of disease and accurately evaluate the outcomes. There are several reasons the treatment strategies are considerably tested on animal models: (1) animals offer a degree of environmental and genetic manipulations that are rarely feasible in humans as well as unique insights into the pathophysiology and etiology of disease that frequently reveal novel targets for directed treatments; (2) if preliminary testing on animals shows their not clinically useful results, it may not be essential to test on humans; and (3) the authorities concerned with public protection have to ensure the toxicity and safety of the treatment strategies through animal testing [54].

Progress has been made in the area of assessment and measurement, either the comprehensive evaluation of burn pathological mechanisms or novel therapeutic approaches, by involving the animal models of burn. As we have discussed before, there are numerous animal models of burn established to disclose these issues. The ultimate goal of these animal studies is to examine a safe and effective test condition


#### **Table 1.**

*Comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of burn animal model.*

for clinical trials in humans with burn injuries. Generally, the choice of animals for burn model is mainly based on cost and ethics and further is based on which species will give the best correlation to human trials.

Several substantial advancements have been made in burn patient care such as controlling wound healing, developing novel graft and coverage preferences, optimizing dietary needs, and testing unique pharmacological interventions, resulting in an improved patient's survival and decreased hospitalization period [11]. For example, Wang et al. established a clinical scar in a pig burn model that is found to greatly correlate with scar histology, wound size, and reepithelialization data [55]. This clinical scar scale demonstrated a reliable and independent tool for assessing the burn wound healing outcomes without using other healing and scar measuring systems. Clinically, scar appearance and function are the major concerns to both burn victims and their carers, so its minimization is one of the ultimate goals of burn care, which relies on the appropriate evaluation of the scars.
