ArticleBurns & trauma2022
Efficacy and safety of external tissue expansion technique in the treatment of soft tissue defects: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes and complication rates.
Article in Burns & trauma, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- From metabolic node to smart building block: α-Ketoglutarate-empowered biomaterials for programmable cell fate.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- Spatiotemporal decoding of skin biology: development, aging, disease, and regeneration.Burns & trauma · 2026Article
- Skin Stretching Techniques: A Review of Clinical Application in Wound Repair.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- Application of Modified Skin Stretching for Soft Tissue Defect Reconstruction in the Ankle and Foot: A Retrospective Report.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
- Mechanical force regulates the paracrine functions of ADSCs to assist skin expansion in rats.Stem cell research & therapy · 2024Article
- Continuous External Tissue Expansion for Closure of Forehead Flap Donor Site.The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2024Article
- Novel strategies in scalp expansion: improvements and applications of tissue expanders.Burns & trauma · 2024Article
- Harnessing the Power ofInternational journal of nanomedicine · 2024Article
- Theta-Gel-Reinforced Hydrogel Composites for Potential Tensile Load-Bearing Soft Tissue Repair Applications.Journal of functional biomaterials · 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
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Currently, various external tissue expansion devices are becoming widely used. Considering the scarcity of relevant application standards, this systematic review was performed to explore the effectiveness and safety of external tissue expansion techniques for the reconstruction of soft tissue defects. Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of external tissue expansion technique was conducted. A comprehensive search was performed in the following electronic databases: PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library (Wiley Online Library), and Web of Science. Studies reporting patients with soft tissue defects under the treatment of external tissue expansion technique were included. Results: A total of 66 studies with 22 different types of external tissue expansion devices met the inclusion criteria. We performed a descriptive analysis of different kinds of devices. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the external tissue expansion technique for different aetiologies. The pooled mean wound healing time among patients with defects after fasciotomy was 10.548 days [95% confidence interval (CI) = 5.796-15.299]. The pooled median wound healing times of patients with defects after excisional surgery, trauma, chronic ulcers and abdominal defects were 11.218 days (95% CI = 6.183-16.253), 11.561 days (95% CI = 7.062-16.060), 15.956 days (95% CI = 11.916-19.996) and 12.853 days (95% CI=9.444-16.227), respectively. The pooled wound healing rates of patients with defects after fasciotomy, excisional surgery, trauma, chronic ulcers and abdominal defects were 93.8% (95% CI=87.1-98.2%), 97.2% (95%CI=92.2-99.7%), 97.0% (95%CI=91.2-99.8%), 99.5% (95%CI=97.6-100%), and 96.8% (95%CI=79.2-100%), respectively. We performed a subgroup analysis in patients with diabetic ulcers and open abdominal wounds. The pooled median wound healing time of patients with diabetic ulcers was 11.730 days (95% CI = 10.334-13.125). The pooled median wound healing time of patients with open abdomen defects was 48.810 days (95% CI = 35.557-62.063) and the pooled successful healing rate was 68.8% (95% CI = 45.9-88.1%). A total of 1686 patients were included, 265 (15.7%) of whom experienced complications. The most common complication was dehiscence ( Conclusions: Our systematic review is the first to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of external tissue expansion in the management of soft tissue defects. However, we must interpret the meta-analysis results with caution considering the limitations of this review. Large-scale randomized controlled trials and long-term follow-up studies are still needed to confirm the effectiveness and evaluate the quality of healing.
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.