ArticleScientific reports2024
The influence of microbial colonization on inflammatory versus pro-healing trajectories in combat extremity wounds.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-qualityMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Early post-trauma wound microbiota and its association with pain outcomes and mental health in combat-related extremity injuries: a prospective analysis.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
A combination of improved body armor, medical transportation, and treatment has led to the increased survival of warfighters from combat extremity injuries predominantly caused by blasts in modern conflicts. Despite advances, a high rate of complications such as wound infections, wound failure, amputations, and a decreased quality of life exist. To study the molecular underpinnings of wound failure, wound tissue biopsies from combat extremity injuries had RNA extracted and sequenced. Wounds were classified by colonization (colonized vs. non-colonized) and outcome (healed vs. failed) status. Differences in gene expression were investigated between timepoints at a gene level, and longitudinally by multi-gene networks, inferred proportions of immune cells, and expression of healing-related functions. Differences between wound outcomes in colonized wounds were more apparent than in non-colonized wounds. Colonized/healed wounds appeared able to mount an adaptive immune response to infection and progress beyond the inflammatory stage of healing, while colonized/failed wounds did not. Although, both colonized and non-colonized failed wounds showed increasing inferred immune and inflammatory programs, non-colonized/failed wounds progressed beyond the inflammatory stage, suggesting different mechanisms of failure dependent on colonization status. Overall, these data reveal gene expression profile differences in healing wounds that may be utilized to improve clinical treatment paradigms.
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.