SynthesisInternational wound journal2024
The impact of ulinastatin on wound infection and healing in patients with burn wounds: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of ulinastatin on wound infection and healing in patients with burn wounds: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2024Pooled it
- RETRACTION: The Impact of Ulinastatin on Wound Infection and Healing in Patients With Burn Wounds: A Meta-Analysis.International wound journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2025-03-03Author Unresponsive · Compromised Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Burn injuries result in localised tissue damage and precipitate systemic responses; routine clinical treatments, which typically include metabolic nutritional support and anti-infection therapies, do not yield optimal outcomes. Therefore, we aimed to systematically evaluate the effects of ulinastatin on wound infection and healing in patients with burns to provide reliable evidence-based recommendations for burn treatment. An electronic search of the Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Wanfang, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases, supplemented by manual searches, was conducted from database inception to October 2023 to collect randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of ulinastatin for the treatment of burns. Two researchers screened all retrieved articles according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria; the included studies were evaluated for quality, and the relevant data were extracted. Stata 17.0 software was employed for data analysis. Overall, 8 RCTs with 803 patients were included, with 404 and 399 in the ulinastatin and conventional treatment groups, respectively. The analysis revealed that wound infections (odds ratio [OR] = 0.08, 95% CI: 0.02-0.35, p = 0.001) and complications (OR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.10-0.42, p < 0.001) were significantly lower, and wound healing time (standardised mean differences [SMD] = -1.31, 95% CI: -2.05 to -0.57, p = 0.001) was significantly shorter, in the ulinastatin groups than in the control group. This meta-analysis revealed that ulinastatin can effectively reduce the incidence of wound infections and complications and significantly shorten the duration of wound healing in patients with burns, thereby promoting early recovery in these patients.
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.