ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2020
Effects of homologous and heterologous rich platelets plasma, compared to poor platelets plasma, on cutaneous healing of rabbits.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantification and characterization of collagen in experimentally induced wounds treated with different types of platelet-rich plasma gel.Cell and tissue banking · 2026Article
- Human versus Rat PRF on Collagen Membranes: A Pilot Study of Mineralization in Rat Calvaria Defect Model.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Human Platelet-Rich Plasma Regulates Canine Mesenchymal Stem Cell Migration through Aquaporins.Stem cells international · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate and compare the effects of homologous and heterologous PRP (Platelet-Rich Plasma) on the quality and speed of skin wound healing, compared to Poor Platelet Plasma (PPP).
methodsTwenty-one male adult rabbits were used; two for preparing homologous PRP, with the rest of them separated randomly in three groups, according to the treatment received: PPP - control (n=5), homologous PRP (n=7), heterologous (n=7). Excisional skin wounds were made on the back of the animals, for the application of homologous and heterologous PPP and PRP. At the 14th post-operative day (POD), the animals were subjected to a new wound, and the treatments were inverted. The wounds were evaluated macroscopically and histologically.
resultsA larger percentage of scar retraction was observed on the group treated with heterologous PRP, compared to homologous PRP, at the third POD, an increase of 25.03% (p=0.01). No other statistically significant differences among treatments were observed. Among every group, skin healing was efficient, without local adverse effects.
conclusionsHeterologous PRP contributed with more tissue retraction at the beginning of the wound healing process. After this, there were no differences on the wound healing skin process treated with PRP or PPP. However, our findings suggest the presence of others plasmatic factors, besides platelets, which could also contribute to the wound healing process, and thus, should be further investigated.
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.