ReviewJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2021
Experimental animal modelling for pressure injury: A systematic review.
Review in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2021. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Novel Murine Model for Studying Impaired Wound Healing in Diabetes.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Innovative Strategies: Use of Stromal Cell-Derived Secretome for Chronic Wound Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Pressure Ulcers and Nutrients: From Established Evidence to Gaps in Knowledge.Current medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
- Topical delivery of meropenem via spanlastic carbopol gel:Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Healing Outcomes in Clinical and Pre-Clinical Models to Treat Pressure Ulcers: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Cinnamaldehyde-Based Self-Nanoemulsion (CA-SNEDDS) Accelerates Wound Healing and Exerts Antimicrobial, Antioxidant, and Anti-Inflammatory Effects in Rats' Skin Burn Model.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Bio-Evaluation of the Wound Healing Activity ofAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPressure injury (PI) is a potentially serious condition that is often a consequence of other medical illnesses. It remains a challenge for the clinicians and the researcher to fully understand and develop a technique for comprehending pathogenicity, prevention and treatment. Several animal models have been created to understand the multifaceted cellular and biochemical processes of PI. There are numerous known intrinsic and extrinsic factors influencing the recovery of PI. Some of the important factors are friction, spinal cord injury, diabetes, nutrition, aging, infection, medication, obesity and vascular diseases. The dearth of optimal, pre-clinical animal models capable of mimicking the human PI remains a major challenge for its cure. An ideal animal model must endeavour the reproducibility, clinical significance, and most importantly effective translation into clinical use.
methodsIn this current systematic review, a methodological literature review was conducted on the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed/Medline, Research Scholar and Science Direct databases were searched. We conferred the animal models like mice, rats, pigs and dogs used in the PI experiments between January 1980 to January 2021. Typically, methods like Ischemia-reperfusion (IR), monoplegia pressure sore and mechanical non-invasive have been discussed. These were used to generate pressure injuries in small and large animal models. RESULTS AND
conclusionDifferent animal models (mouse, rat, pig, dog) were evaluated based on ease of handling, availability for research, their size, skin type and the technical skills required. Studies suggest that mice and rats are the best-suited animals as their skin healing by contraction resembles the skin healing in humans. In most of the studies with mice and rats, the time taken for the recovery was between 1 and 3 weeks. Further, various techniques discussed in the current systematics review, supports the statement that the Ischemia-reperfusion (IR) method is the most suited method to study pressure injury. It is a controlled method that can develop different stages of PI and does not require any specialized setup for the application.
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.