ArticleProteome science2014
Proteomic sample preparation for blast wound characterization.
Article in Proteome science, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Wound fluid sampling methods for proteomic studies: A scoping review.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society · 2022Article
- Burn wound healing and treatment: review and advancements.Critical care (London, England) · 2015Review
- Article
- Wound outcome in combat injuries is associated with a unique set of protein biomarkers.Journal of translational medicine · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBlast wounds often involve diverse tissue types and require substantial time and treatment for appropriate healing. Some of these subsequent wounds become colonized with bacteria requiring a better understanding of how the host responds to these bacteria and what proteomic factors contribute wound healing outcome. In addition, using reliable and effective proteomic sample preparation procedures can lead to novel biomarkers for improved diagnosis and therapy.
resultsTo address this need, suitable sample preparation for 2-D DIGE proteomic characterization of wound effluent and serum samples from combat-wounded patients was investigated. Initial evaluation of crude effluent and serum proved the necessity of high abundant protein depletion. Subsequently, both samples were successfully depleted using Agilent Multiple Affinity Removal system and showed greatly improved 2-D spot maps, comprising 1,800 and 1,200 protein spots, respectively.
conclusionHigh abundant protein removal was necessary for both wound effluent and serum. This is the first study to show a successful method for high abundant protein depletion from wound effluent which is compatible with downstream 2-D DIGE analysis. This development allows for improved biomarker discovery in wound effluent and serum samples.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.