SynthesisJournal of diabetes research2020
The Efficacy and Safety of Acellular Matrix Therapy for Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.
Synthesis in Journal of diabetes research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of a purified reconstituted bilayer matrix in the management of chronic diabetic foot ulcers improves patient outcomes vs standard of care: Results of a prospective randomised controlled multi-centre clinical trial.International wound journal · 2022Trial
- Accelerated Wound Healing with a Bilayer Biodegradable Synthetic Matrix in Post-Surgical Diabetes-Related Foot Wounds: A Randomised Controlled Trial.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Comprehensive Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: Current Evidence and Practice.Journal of diabetes · 2026Review
- Sex-specific nanomedicine- and biomaterials-based therapies of chronic wounds.Nature reviews bioengineering · 2024Article
- Effects of different treatment measures on the efficacy of diabetic foot ulcers: a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- A long-term follow-up study of diabetic foot ulcer using micronized acellular dermal matrix.International wound journal · 2023Article
- Comment on "An observational pilot study using a purified reconstituted bilayer matrix to treat non-healing diabetic foot ulcers".International wound journal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcellular matrix (AM) therapy has shown promise in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) in several studies. The clinical effects of AM therapy were not well established. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to examine the efficacy and safety of AM therapy for patients with DFUs.
methodsA literature search of 5 databases was performed to identify RCTs comparing AM therapy to standard therapy (ST) in patients with DFUs. The primary outcome was the complete healing rate and the secondary outcomes mainly included time to complete healing and adverse events.
resultsNine RCTs involving 897 patients were included. Compared with ST group, patients allocated to AM group had a higher complete healing rate both at 12 weeks (risk ratio (RR) = 1.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.31 to 2.30) and 16 weeks (RR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.28 to 1.91), a shorter time to complete healing (mean difference (MD) = -2.41; 95% CI: -3.49 to -1.32), and fewer adverse events (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.44 to 0.93).
conclusionThe present study suggests that AM therapy as an adjuvant treatment could further promote the healing of full-thickness, noninfected, and nonischemia DFUs. AM therapy also has a safety profile. More large well-designed randomized clinical trials with long follow-up duration are needed to further explore the efficacy and safety of AM therapy for DFUs.
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.