Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23440784›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013

Skin grafting for venous leg ulcers.

June E Jones, E Andrea Nelson, Aws Al-Hity

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
16.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 187 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Inpatient Management of Mucocutaneous GVHD.Current dermatology reports · 2019
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

June E JonesSouthport, Merseyside, UK. jonj@btinternet.com.
E Andrea Nelson
Aws Al-Hity
Merseytravel · GBUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVenous leg ulceration is a recurrent, chronic, disabling condition. It affects up to one in 100 people at some time in their lives. Standard treatments are simple dressings and compression bandages or stockings. Sometimes, despite treatment, ulcers remain open for months or years. Sometimes skin grafts are used to stimulate healing. These may be taken, or grown into a dressing, from the patient's own uninjured skin (autografts), or applied as a sheet of bioengineered skin grown from donor cells (allograft). Preserved skin from other animals, such as pigs, has also been used (xenografts).

objectivesTo assess the effect of skin grafts for treating venous leg ulcers. SEARCH

methodsFor this update we modified the search strategies and conducted searches of The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 27 July 2012); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7); Ovid MEDLINE (2008 to July Week 3 2012); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, July 26, 2012); Ovid EMBASE (2008 to 2012 Week 29); and EBSCO CINAHL (2008 to 26 July 2012). We did not apply date or language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of skin grafts in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently undertook data extraction and assessment of study quality. MAIN

resultsFor this update of the review, we identified one new trial, bringing the total to 17 trials (1034 participants) - all of which were generally at moderate or high risk of bias. In 12 trials participants also received compression bandaging.Eleven trials compared a graft with standard care in which no graft was used. Two of these trials (102 participants) compared a dressing with an autograft; three trials (80 participants) compared frozen allografts with dressings, and two trials (45 participants) compared fresh allografts with dressings. Two trials (345 participants) compared tissue-engineered skin (bilayer artificial skin) with a dressing. In two trials (97 participants) a single-layer dermal replacement was compared with standard care.Six trials compared alternative skin grafting techniques. The first trial (92 participants) compared autografts with frozen allograft, a second (51 participants) compared a pinch graft (autograft) with porcine dermis (xenograft), the third (110 participants) compared growth-arrested human keratinocytes and fibroblasts with placebo, the fourth (10 participants) compared an autograft delivered on porcine pads with an autograft delivered on porcine gelatin microbeads, the fifth trial (92 participants) compared a meshed graft with a cultured keratinocyte autograft, and the sixth trial (50 participants) compared a frozen keratinocyte allograft with a lyophilised (freeze-dried) keratinocyte allografts.Significantly more ulcers healed when treated with bilayer artificial skin than with dressings. There was insufficient evidence from the other trials to determine whether other types of skin grafting increased the healing of venous ulcers. AUTHORS'

conclusionsBilayer artificial skin, used in conjunction with compression bandaging, increases venous ulcer healing compared with a simple dressing plus compression. Further research is needed to assess whether other forms of skin grafts increase ulcer healing.

Indexed as

Skin TransplantationAdultHumansLeg UlcerOcclusive DressingsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTransplantation, Autologous

Identifiers

PMID23440784
PMCPMC7061325
OpenAlexW1948963940

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.