ArticleJournal of emergencies, trauma, and shock
Revisiting the Role of Amniotic Membrane Dressing in Acute Large Traumatic Wounds: A Randomized Feasibility Study at a Level 1 Trauma Centre.
Article in Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shock. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Amniotic Membrane Transplantation for Wound Healing, Tissue Regeneration and Immune Modulation.Stem cell reviews and reports · 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
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Acute large traumatic wounds require temporary dressing prior to the definitive soft tissue reconstruction, as the physiological derangement during the immediate postinjury period delays the definitive surgical intervention. Selecting an ideal dressing material from numerous available synthetic dressings and skin substitutes poses a challenge. Although amniotic membrane (AM) scaffold has a definitive role in promoting wound healing in burns and chronic wounds, however, its efficacy in acute large traumatic wound is lacking. The present trial aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of AM in wound bed preparation before the definitive soft-tissue reconstruction in acute large traumatic wounds. Methods: Sixty patients with acute large traumatic wounds (>10 cm × 10 cm) were divided into two groups (conventional dressing and AM dressing) using simple mixed block randomization. Wounds were assessed using the Bates Jensen Score at various timelines for the signs of early wound healing. The primary outcome was to evaluate the time taken for the wound bed preparation for definitive soft-tissue reconstruction. The secondary outcome was the pain assessment and complications, if any. Results: There was significant reduction in the wound exudate as well as peripheral tissue edema in the intervention group ( Conclusion: AM dressings are safe and efficacious with significant reduction in wound exudates and peripheral edema. However, these dressings do not hasten the wound maturation as compared to conventional dressings. AM dressings can be used as a less painful alternative to conventional dressing in the management of large acute posttraumatic wounds.
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.