ArticleAnnals of burns and fire disasters2022
Efficacy Of Skin Substitutes For Management Of Acute Burn Cases: A Systematic Review.
Article in Annals of burns and fire disasters, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring evidence gaps in clinical trials in thermal burns care: an umbrella review.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- Outcomes of dermal substitutes in burns and burn scar reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair SocietyPooled it
- Indications for the use of dermal substitutes in patients with acute burns and in reconstructive surgery after burns: A systematic review.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair SocietyPooled it
- Advancements in pediatric tissue engineering: scaffold-based and cell-driven approaches.Cell and tissue banking · 2026Review
- Pediatric Burns: Biological and Tissue Engineered Skin Substitutes-A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- [Efficacy of artificial dermis in repairing small to medium-sized deep partial-thickness scalds in infants and young children].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2025Observational
- Can Pure Silk Compete with the Established Mepilex AgEuropean burn journal · 2025Article
- Polylactic Acid Membranes, a Novel Adjunct Treatment for Bullous Impetigo.Infectious disease reports · 2025Article
- The Role of Skin Substitutes in the Therapeutical Management of Burns Affecting Functional Areas.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Comparison of the effectiveness of three different skin substitutes for the treatment of pediatric burns.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Article
- Bromelain in Burn Care: Advancements in Enzymatic Debridement and Patient Outcomes.European burn journal · 2024Review
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The early management of burn cases has always been a challenging medical problem. Skin substitutes have been consistently studied and employed as the prospective treatment modality for burn cases worldwide. However, this treatment method remains uncommon in many developing countries. This systematic review is designed to weigh the efficacy of skin substitutes compared to standard treatment for managing acute burn cases. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane database up to February 2020 combined with additional reference searching. Studies were restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with no date and language restrictions. We evaluated the risk of bias with a revised risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2). Data were categorized based on skin substitutes with further subgroup analysis for each skin substitute. We included 13 studies with six types of skin substitutes, Biobrane®, TransCyte ®, Integra®, Glyaderm®, Suprathel® and Apligraft®. Outcomes measured included wound healing time, pain, length of hospitalization and scar formation. The findings for all skin substitutes demonstrated less severe pain compared to the control group. Faster wound healing time, scar formation and length of hospitalization were identified as heterogeneous depending on the type of skin substitutes used. All of the skin substitutes studied exhibited at least non-inferior to superior performance compared to standard treatment in terms of efficacy in treating acute burn wounds, not limited to burn depth, size, location or patient age.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37016595PMC10067142W4362602457What 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.