Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38126221›Full record

SynthesisInternational wound journal2024

A systematic review of the efficacy, safety and satisfaction of regenerative medicine treatments, including platelet-rich plasma, stromal vascular fraction and stem cell-conditioned medium for hypertrophic scars and keloids.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, Arash PourMohammad, Azadeh Goodarzi

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Review
  19. Comprehensive Update on Keloid Management.Archives of plastic surgery · 2026
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alireza JafarzadehDepartment of Dermatology, Rasool Akram Medical Complex Clinical Research Development Center (RCRDC), School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5878-9778
Arash PourMohammadFaculty of Medicine, Iran university of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Azadeh GoodarziDepartment of Dermatology, Rasool Akram Medical Complex Clinical Research Development Center (RCRDC), School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1249-4429

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The primary objective of this study is to examine the efficiency of various regenerative medicine approaches, such as platelet-rich plasma, cell therapy, stromal vascular fraction, exosomes and stem cell-conditioned medium, in the process of healing hypertrophic and keloid scars. Major databases including PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were systematically searched, and based on the content of the articles and the inclusion and exclusion criteria, eight articles were selected. Out of these eight articles, there were two non-randomized clinical trial studies (25%), one randomized, single-blinded comparative study (12.5%), one retrospective clinical observational study (12.5%) and four randomized clinical trial studies (50%). We employed EndNote X8 and Google Sheets to conduct article reviews and extract relevant data. Following the review phase, the studies underwent analysis and categorization. In all eight reviewed studies, the effectiveness of regenerative medicine in treating hypertrophic scars and keloids has been proven. Out of these studies, five (62.5%) focused on the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma, two study (25%) examined the effectiveness of stromal vascular fraction and one study (12.5%) explored the efficacy of stem cell-conditioned medium. In two studies (25%), the treatment methods were added to standard treatment, while in six studies (75%), regenerative medicine was used as the sole treatment method and compared with standard treatment. The use of these treatment methods did not result in any serious side effects for the patients. Regenerative medicine is an effective method with minimal side effects for the treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids. It can be used as a monotherapy or in combination with other treatment methods. However, further studies are needed to thoroughly evaluate the effectiveness of all sub-branches of this method.

Indexed as

Cicatrix, HypertrophicKeloidPlatelet-Rich PlasmaClinical Trials as TopicCulture Media, ConditionedHumansPersonal SatisfactionRegenerative MedicineStromal Vascular FractionTreatment OutcomeCulture Media, Conditionedplatelet‐rich plasmaregenerative medicinescarsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38126221
PMCPMC10961894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.