ReviewCureus2022
Methodologies of Autologous Skin Cell Spray Graft.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advances in traditional Chinese medicine for burn treatment: mechanisms, therapeutic approaches, and innovative preparations.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Healthcare workers continue to struggle with skin wound management. Despite the fact that there have been many methods created throughout the decades for skin regeneration, contemporary developments in regenerative medicine provide highly reliable methods for creating synthetic skin replacements, such as electrospinning, 3D bioprinting, or spraying, among all others. Specifically, skin sprays have been a cutting-edge method that is currently undergoing clinical testing and has lots of promise for providing cells and hydrogels to cure both acute and chronic wounds. Deposition of cells and scaffolding materials in successive layers over the burnt regions characterises 3D bioprinting for burn injury repair. Depending on the desired outcome, bioprinting of skin may be performed in vivo or in vitro. However, the location of the printing and the time required for the tissue to mature separates these two methods. Bioprinted skin for use in burn repair faces technical and regulatory hurdles before it may be used in clinical settings. Skin sprays provide various benefits to traditional wound care methods, inclusive of ease of administration, the ability to treat broad wound regions, and a consistent dispersion of the sprayed substance. The most recent developments in this technology are reviewed in this article, along with a thorough explanation of investigational and presently marketed acellular and cellular skin spray solutions that are utilized to treat a range of illnesses and administer various experimental materials. Additionally, we describe regulatory processes for their capitalization and cover key clinical studies for various skin illnesses and associated treatment circumstances because skin spray products are susceptible to several classifications. Finally, we provide an argument and offer potential future developments in the biotechnology of skin sprays for improved clinical dermatological applications.
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.