Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32859266›Full record

SynthesisStem cell research & therapy2020

Efficacy assessment of mesenchymal stem cell transplantation for burn wounds in animals: a systematic review.

Hanxiao Yi, Yang Wang, Zhen Yang, Zhiqin Xie

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Stem cell research & therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Burn Wound Management.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hanxiao YiThe First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17, Yongwai Zhengjie, Nanchang, JiangXi Province, China.
Yang WangSpine Surgery, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun-Yat Sen University, No. 600, Tianhe Road, Tianhe District, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Zhen YangThe First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17, Yongwai Zhengjie, Nanchang, JiangXi Province, China. yangzhen11@hotmail.com.
Zhiqin XieThe First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17, Yongwai Zhengjie, Nanchang, JiangXi Province, China.
First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University · CNThird Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinically, severe burns remain one of the most challenging issues, but an ideal treatment is yet absent. Our purpose is to compare the efficacy of stem cell therapy in a preclinical model of burn wound healing.

methodsResearch reports on mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) for burn wound healing were retrieved from 5 databases: PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes reported in this article include the un-healing rate of the wound area, the closure rate, and the wound area. Secondary outcomes included CD-31, vascular density, interleukin (IL)-10, thickness of eschar tissue, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and white blood cell count. Finally, a subgroup analysis was conducted to explore heterogeneity that potentially impacted the primary outcomes. A fixed-effects model with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was performed when no significant heterogeneity existed. Otherwise, a random-effects model was used. All data analysis was conducted by using Engauge Digitizer 10.8 and R software.

resultsTwenty eligible articles were finally included in the analysis. Stem cell therapy greatly improved the closure rate (2.00, 95% CI 0.52 to 3.48, p = 0.008) and compromised the wound area (- 2.36; 95% CI - 4.90 to 0.18; p = 0.069) rather than the un-healing rate of the wound area (- 11.10, 95% CI - 32.97 to 10.78, p = 0.320). Though p was 0.069, there was a trend toward shrinkage of the burn wound area after stem cell therapy. Vascular density (4.69; 95% CI 0.06 to 9.31; p = 0.047) and thickness of eschar tissue (6.56, 95% CI 1.15 to 11.98, p = 0.017) were also discovered to be significantly improved in the burn site of stem cell-treated animals. Moreover, we observed that animals in the stem cell group had an increased white blood cell count (0.84, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.66, p = 0.047) 5 days post treatment. Other indicators, such as VEGF (p = 0.381), CD-31 (p = 0.335) and IL-10 (p = 0.567), were not significantly impacted.

conclusionsDespite limited data from preclinical trials, this meta-analysis suggests that stem cell therapy is curative in decreasing the burn wound area and provides some insights into future clinical studies of stem cell therapy for burns.

Indexed as

BurnsMesenchymal Stem CellsMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationAnimalsVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AWound HealingVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AAnimalsBurn woundEfficacyMeta-analysisStem cell therapy

Identifiers

PMID32859266
PMCPMC7456061
OpenAlexW3082827254

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.