ArticleRomanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologie
Nanoparticle-functionalized dressings for the treatment of third-degree skin burns - histopathological and immunohistochemical study.
Article in Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologie. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regeneration of the skin wound by two different crosslinkers:Iranian journal of basic medical sciences · 2025Article
- Mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles in skin wound healing: roles, opportunities and challenges.Military Medical Research · 2023Review
- Treatment of skin defects with PRP enriched with hyaluronic acid - histological aspects in rat model.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Skin burns are one of the most common injuries associated with increased morbidity and mortality, especially in the children and the elderlies. Severe burns, especially, result in a systemic immune and inflammatory response, which may reflect in multiple organ insufficiency, and a fast and effective local restorative process is essential for functionality recovering, as well as for interrupting the generalized systemic response. We have aimed here to assess the effect of different wound dressings in what it regards the morphology and clinical restoration after a skin burn. On a rat animal model, we have evaluated the macroscopic and histopathological features of controlled third degree skin burns in control animals versus treatments with local dressings of silver sulfadiazine (SDA) cream, simple gel (G), gel + silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) (G+NPS), gel + exosomes (G+EXO) and gel + AgNPs + exosomes (Gel+NPS+EXO), at 14 days and, respectively, 21 days after the lesion. Tissue fragments were harvested and processed for histopathology and immunohistochemistry. Immunofluorescence was utilized to evaluate the maturity of underlaying granulation tissue based on double stainings for smooth muscle actin (SMA) and cluster of differentiation 31 (CD31). Our study showed variability in what it regards the vessel density and immunoexpression of SMA between the treatments, and image analysis revealed that most SMA reduction and blood vessel density reduction in the maturing granulation tissue occurred for the G+NPS and G+NPS+EXO treatments. A complete re-epithelization was also observed for the G+NPS+EXO treatment. Overall, our results show that improved topic treatments promote faster re-epithelization and reparation of the dermis after skin burn lesions, providing thus an avenue for new treatments that aim both local recuperation and systemic infection prevention.
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.