ArticleMolecular medicine reports2017
Early anticoagulation therapy for severe burns complicated by inhalation injury in a rabbit model.
Article in Molecular medicine reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
- Correction · 2025-10-29Error in Image · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Upgrade/Update of Prior Notice(s) · · See also: https://pubpeer.com/publications/3BCB3EB3AAF3DD5D040A3C3820E555
- Expression of concern · 2025-09-23Author Unresponsive · Concerns/Issues about Data · Concerns/Issues about Image · Duplication of Data · Duplication of/in Image · Euphemisms for Duplication · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Updated to Correction · · See also: https://pubpeer.com/publications/3BCB3EB3AAF3DD5D040A3C3820E555
- Erratum issued
- Expression of concern
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to determine the effects of early anticoagulation treatment on severe burns complicated by inhalation injury in a rabbit model. Under anesthetization, an electrical burns instrument (100˚C) was used to scald the backs of rabbits for 15 sec, which established a 30% III severe burns model. Treatment of the rabbits with early anticoagulation effectively improved the severe burns complicated by inhalation injury‑induced lung injury, reduced PaO2, PaCO2 and SPO2 levels, suppressed the expression of tumor necrosis factor‑α, interleukin (IL)‑1β and IL‑6, and increased the activity of IL‑10. In addition, it was found that early anticoagulation treatment effectively suppressed the activities of caspase‑3 and caspase‑9, upregulated the protein expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and decreased the protein expression of protease‑activated receptor 1 (PAR1) in the severe burns model. It was concluded that early anticoagulation treatment affected the severe burns complicated by inhalation injury in a rabbit model through the upregulation of VEGF and downregulation of PAR1 signaling pathways. Thus, early anticoagulation is a potential therapeutic option for severe burns complicated by inhalation injury.
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.