Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38895546›Full record

ArticleHealth science reports2024

Assessing placental membrane treatment efficiency in diabetic foot ulcers: Processing for retention versus lamination.

Robert G Frykberg, Zwelithini Tunyiswa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

2 authors.

Robert G FrykbergOpen Wound Research Puyallup Washington USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9095-303X
Zwelithini TunyiswaOpen Wound Research Puyallup Washington USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Diabetic foot ulcers are a severe complication in diabetic patients, significantly impact healthcare systems and patient quality of life, often leading to hospitalization and amputation. Traditional Standard of Care (SOC) treatments are inadequate for many patients, necessitating advanced wound care products (AWCPs) like human placental membranes. This study conducts a retrospective analysis to compare the effectiveness of two human placental membrane products, retention-processed amnion chorion (RE-AC) and lamination-processed amnion chorion (L-AC) in managing chronic diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Methods: The study collected retrospective observational data from electronic health records (EHRs) of patients treated for DFU at three outpatient wound care centers. Patients were categorized into two cohorts based on the treatment received. Key metrics included wound size progression and the number of product applications. The analysis employed Bayesian estimation, utilizing an analysis of covariance model with a Hurdle Gamma likelihood. Results: We found that RE-AC achieved a marginally higher expected Percent Area Reduction (xPAR) in DFUs compared to L-AC at 12 weeks (67.3% vs. 52.6%). RE-AC also required fewer applications, suggesting greater efficiency in general wound closure. Probability of full wound closure was similar in both groups (0.738 vs 0.740 in RE-AC and L-AC, respectively). Conclusion: The findings suggest that while L-AC might be slightly more effective in complete ulcer healing, RE-AC offers overall better treatment efficiency, especially in reducing the frequency of applications. This efficiency can lead to improved patient comfort, reduced treatment costs, and optimized resource utilization in healthcare settings.

Indexed as

amniotic tissuesdiabetic foot ulcerswound healing

Identifiers

PMID38895546
PMCPMC11183911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.