ReviewInternational wound journal2024
A review on wound management strategies in enhanced recovery after craniotomy: An in-depth analysis of their influence on patient recovery and surgical outcomes.
Review 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 It has been retracted, and should not be counted.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.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- RETRACTION: A Review on Wound Management Strategies in Enhanced Recovery After Craniotomy: An In-Depth Analysis of their Influence on Patient Recovery and Surgical Outcomes.International wound journal · 2025Article
- A review on wound management strategies in enhanced recovery after craniotomy: An in-depth analysis of their influence on patient recovery and surgical outcomes.International wound journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2025-04-02Concerns/Issues about Peer Review · Compromised Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Craniotomy, an essential neurosurgical operation, poses distinct difficulties in the realm of post-operative care, specifically with regard to the management of wounds. Efficient wound management is critical in order to optimize the surgical outcomes, reduce complications and facilitate a speedier recovery. The purpose of this comprehensive review was to assess contemporary wound management approaches as they pertain to improved recovery following craniotomy. This was achieved by contrasting conventional methods with more recent and innovative techniques and analysing the effects of these approaches on patient recovery and surgical results. An exhaustive literature search was undertaken, comprising narrative reviews, clinical studies, peer-reviewed articles and expert opinions. The emphasis was on the evolution of wound management strategies and techniques utilized after cranial section, as well as their contributions to patient recovery. The analysis reveals that while conventional wound management methods, including suturing and antiseptics, continue to be essential, innovative strategies such as negative pressure wound therapy, skin adhesives and advanced pain management protocols are becoming increasingly recognized. It has been demonstrated that these novel approaches improve recovery by decreasing the incidence of infections, enhancing patient comfort and producing superior cosmetic results. Nevertheless, obstacles continue to endure, including patient-specific variables, technological and financial considerations and the enduring consequences of recovery. Thus the treatment of wounds during craniotomy recuperation necessitates an integrated strategy that incorporates conventional techniques alongside contemporary advancements. Progress in this domain necessitates the customization of approaches to suit the unique requirements of each patient, the resolution of identified obstacles and an emphasis on ongoing investigation and interdisciplinary cooperation. The ever-changing terrain of wound management approaches underscores the ever-changing character of neurosurgical treatment and the continuous endeavour to enhance patient results following cranial resection.
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.