Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27547189›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in physiology2016

Engineered Biopolymeric Scaffolds for Chronic Wound Healing.

Laura E Dickinson, Sharon Gerecht

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05326022 (Microcurrent Therapy Versus Low-Level Laser Therapy on Post-surgical Wound Healing), which is not on this map. Cited by 64 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05326022 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Microcurrent Therapy Versus Low-Level Laser Therapy on Post-surgical Wound Healing

TypeinterventionalSponsorNehad Ahmed Youness Abo-zaidRan2022 to 2022Enrolled90ConditionsWound Healing DelayedArmsMicrocurrent therapy, Low Level Laser Therapy, Medical therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

64 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Optimized Decellularization of a Porcine Fasciocutaneaous Flap.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Nanotechnology-Based Dressings for Wound Management.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Biomaterials for Hemostasis.Annual review of biomedical engineering · 2022
    Review

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Laura E DickinsonGemstone Biotherapeutics Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sharon GerechtDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Institute for NanoBioTechnology, Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Skin regeneration requires the coordinated integration of concomitant biological and molecular events in the extracellular wound environment during overlapping phases of inflammation, proliferation, and matrix remodeling. This process is highly efficient during normal wound healing. However, chronic wounds fail to progress through the ordered and reparative wound healing process and are unable to heal, requiring long-term treatment at high costs. There are many advanced skin substitutes, which mostly comprise bioactive dressings containing mammalian derived matrix components, and/or human cells, in clinical use. However, it is presently hypothesized that no treatment significantly outperforms the others. To address this unmet challenge, recent research has focused on developing innovative acellular biopolymeric scaffolds as more efficacious wound healing therapies. These biomaterial-based skin substitutes are precisely engineered and fine-tuned to recapitulate aspects of the wound healing milieu and target specific events in the wound healing cascade to facilitate complete skin repair with restored function and tissue integrity. This mini-review will provide a brief overview of chronic wound healing and current skin substitute treatment strategies while focusing on recent engineering approaches that regenerate skin using synthetic, biopolymeric scaffolds. We discuss key polymeric scaffold design criteria, including degradation, biocompatibility, and microstructure, and how they translate to inductive microenvironments that stimulate cell infiltration and vascularization to enhance chronic wound healing. As healthcare moves toward precision medicine-based strategies, the potential and therapeutic implications of synthetic, biopolymeric scaffolds as tunable treatment modalities for chronic wounds will be considered.

Indexed as

acellular matricesbiopolymeric scaffoldschronic woundsinflammatorymatrix remodelingskin regenerationskin substitutes

Identifiers

PMID27547189
PMCPMC4975021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.