Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36320618›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2022

Autologous Minimally Manipulated Homologous Adipose Tissue (AMHAT) for Treatment of Nonhealing Diabetic Foot Ulcers.

David G Armstrong, Steven G Harris, Zachary Rasor, Charles M Zelen, Jeehee Kim, Mark Swerdlow, Adam L Isaac

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Repair, Regeneration, and Replacement, Revisited (Redux).Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 3D Printing-Based Hydrogel Dressings for Wound Healing.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

7 authors.

David G ArmstrongDepartment of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif.
Steven G HarrisDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Jefferson Surgical Clinic, Salem, Va.
Zachary RasorDivision of Podiatry, Foot and Ankle Specialists of the Mid-Atlantic (FASMA), LLC, Salem, Va.
Charles M ZelenProfessional Education and Research Institute, Roanoke, Va.
Jeehee KimDivision of Wound Care, Rokit America, Los Angeles, Calif.
Mark SwerdlowDepartment of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif.
Adam L IsaacDivision of Research, Foot and Ankle Specialists of the Mid-Atlantic (FASMA), LLC, Frederick, Md.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetic foot complications are increasingly burdensome for patients, clinicians, and society. Development of innovative therapies to support good quality basic care is a priority among those with an interest in this area. One of these involves scanning and printing tissues to match and conform to a defect (so-called 3D printing). Methods: A single-arm pilot study of ten consecutive patients with a history of a chronic diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), treated with autologous minimally manipulated homologous adipose tissue (AMHAT), dispensed by a specialized 3D bioprinter, Dr. INVIVO, was performed. Patients with nonhealing DFUs present for more than 4 weeks and refractory to standard-of-care therapies were included. Wounds were treated with a single application of AMHAT, and then followed up weekly for up to 12 weeks, or until the wounds healed. The primary outcome measure was complete epithelialization of the wound up to 12 weeks after the treatment. Secondary outcome measures included wound size and/or volume reduction, assessment of ulcer grade, and time to closure. Results: Five wounds were healed by 5 weeks and one at 8 weeks. The mean percent area reduction at 12 weeks was 78.3% (SD: 33.23). Complete closure was achieved in 60% of wounds. The mean time to closure in these wounds was 49.1 days (95% CI, 29.9-68.3). No adverse events were reported. Conclusions: Single treatment of bioprinted AMHAT appears to be a safe and potentially effective treatment modality for patients with chronic DFUs. Further studies are warranted to explore the full potential of 3D bioprinting for tissue repair in this high-risk population.

Identifiers

PMID36320618
PMCPMC9616634

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.