ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2023
Assessment of the quality of the healing process in experimentally induced skin lesions treated with autologous platelet concentrate associated or unassociated with allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells: preliminary results in a large animal model.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Promises and Perspectives of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells in Companion and Farm Animals.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Multimodal Topical Formulations Combining Synthetic Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Levofloxacin, and Plant Extracts for Veterinary Wound and Inflammation Care: In Vivo Efficacy.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Z-Plasty technique in congenital midline cervical cleft; a rare case report & literature review.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Application of Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Exosome alone or Combination Therapy as a Treatment Strategy for Wound Healing.Cell biochemistry and biophysics · 2024Review
- Autologous platelet-rich fibrin enhances skin wound healing in a feline trauma model.BMC veterinary research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regenerative medicine for the treatment of skin lesions is an innovative and rapidly developing field that aims to promote wound healing and restore the skin to its original condition before injury. Over the years, different topical treatments have been evaluated to improve skin wound healing and, among them, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) have shown promising results for this purpose. This study sought to evaluate the quality of the healing process in experimentally induced full-thickness skin lesions treated with PRP associated or unassociated with MSCs in a sheep second intention wound healing model. After having surgically created full-thickness wounds on the back of three sheep, the wound healing process was assessed by performing clinical evaluations, histopathological examinations, and molecular analysis. Treated wounds showed a reduction of inflammation and contraction along with an increased re-epithelialization rate and better maturation of the granulation tissue compared to untreated lesions. In particular, the combined treatment regulated the expression of collagen types I and III resulting in a proper resolution of the granulation tissue contrary to what was observed in untreated wounds; moreover, it led to a better maturation and organization of skin adnexa and collagen fibers in the repaired skin compared to untreated and PRP-treated wounds. Overall, both treatments improved the wound healing process compared to untreated wounds. Wounds treated with PRP and MSCs showed a healing progression that qualitatively resembles a
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.