Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28895073›Full record

ReviewDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2017

Efficacy and Time Sensitivity of Amniotic Membrane treatment in Patients with Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Irakoze Laurent, Manirakiza Astère, Kan Ran Wang, Qing-Feng Cheng, Qi Fu Li

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. One-year safety, healing and amputation rates of Wagner 3-4 diabetic foot ulcers treated with cryopreserved umbilical cord (TTAX01).Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society · 2020
    Article
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

5 authors.

Irakoze LaurentDepartment of Endocrinology, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Manirakiza AstèreDepartment of Oncology, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Kan Ran WangDepartment of Endocrinology, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Qing-Feng ChengDepartment of Endocrinology, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China. cqf19760516@163.com.
Qi Fu LiDepartment of Endocrinology, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDiabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are complex chronic wounds which have a major long-term impact on the morbidity, mortality and quality of patients. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and time sensitivity of human amnion/chorion membrane treatment in patients with chronic DFUs.

methodsThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases were systematically searched to identify relevant articles up to 10 April 2017. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing human amnion/chorion membrane + standard therapy and standard therapy alone in patients with DFUs were included in the analysis. Eligible studies were reviewed and data extracted into standard form. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias was used. Review manager version 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Data were analyzed using a random effect model.

resultsOverall, the initial search of the four databases identified 352 published studies; of these, seven RCTS were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. The overall test effect in the group assessed at 4 weeks was Z = 4.14 [P < 0.0001; odds ratio (OR) 0.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01-0.21]. The overall test effect in the group assessed at 6 weeks was Z = 4.28 (P < 0.0001; OR 0.07; 95% CI 0.02-0.23). The overall effect in the group assessed at 12 weeks was Z = 4.96 (P < 0.00001; OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.04-0.24. The results showed that patients receiving amniotic membrane + standard therapy had far fewer incomplete healing wounds than those receiving standard of care alone. Assessment of the wound healing state at 4 and 6 weeks revealed that the wound healing state was almost the same, but there was a net difference of wound healing state at 12 weeks.

conclusionHuman amnion/chorion membrane + standard of care treatment heals DFUs significantly faster than standard of care alone. When using the amnion in patients with DFUs, the optimal times to assess progress in wound healing should be 4 and 12 weeks.

Indexed as

Amniotic membraneDiabetic foot ulcersMeta-analysisStandard therapySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID28895073
PMCPMC5630554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.