ArticleWound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society
Digital imaging analysis to assess scar phenotype.
Article in Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Classification of Distinct Endotypes in Human Skin Scarring: S.C.A.R.-A Novel Perspective on Dermal Fibrosis.Advances in wound care · 2022Article
- Specialized Pro-Resolving Mediators Reduce Scarring After Cleft Lip Repair.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Automated VSS-based Burn Scar Assessment using Combined Texture and Color Features of Digital Images in Error-Correcting Output Coding.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Palatogenesis and cutaneous repair: A two-headed coin.Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In order to understand the link between the genetic background of patients and wound clinical outcomes, it is critical to have a reliable method to assess the phenotypic characteristics of healed wounds. In this study, we present a novel imaging method that provides reproducible, sensitive, and unbiased assessments of postsurgical scarring. We used this approach to investigate the possibility that genetic variants in orofacial clefting genes are associated with suboptimal healing. Red-green-blue digital images of postsurgical scars of 68 patients, following unilateral cleft lip repair, were captured using the 3dMD imaging system. Morphometric and colorimetric data of repaired regions of the philtrum and upper lip were acquired using ImageJ software, and the unaffected contralateral regions were used as patient-specific controls. Repeatability of the method was high with intraclass correlation coefficient score > 0.8. This method detected a very significant difference in all three colors, and for all patients, between the scarred and the contralateral unaffected philtrum (p ranging from 1.20(-05) to 1.95(-14) ). Physicians' clinical outcome ratings from the same images showed high interobserver variability (overall Pearson coefficient = 0.49) as well as low correlation with digital image analysis results. Finally, we identified genetic variants in TGFB3 and ARHGAP29 associated with suboptimal healing outcome.
Indexed as
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.