ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Recent Updates on the Management of Split-thickness Skin Graft Donor Sites.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Outcomes and Complications of Skin Graft Reconstruction for Complex Wounds at a Tertiary Hospital: A Single-Centre Study in Oman.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Nanofiber Matrix Dressing for Split-Thickness Skin Graft Donor Sites: A Randomized Comparative Clinical Study.Nanotechnology, science and applications · 2026Article
- The Early Burn Wound Microbiome, Not Donor-Site Transfer, Marks Graft Healing Outcome.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This article is a narrative review of split-thickness skin graft donor site (STSG-DS) management since the international guidelines were created in 2018. Although many new interventions have been developed, there is a lack of quality, multicentered clinical trials to produce updated evidence-based recommendations. Methods: Electronic databases, including Google Scholar, Web of Science, Medline, and PubMed, were searched by two independent researchers for literature regarding STSG-DS management published from 2018 through 2022, using specific terms in the text, title, and abstract. The primary endpoint assessed was STSG-DS healing, as measured by wound epithelialization. Results: Thirty-one articles were selected, including three systemic review/meta-analyses, five case series, 14 randomized controlled clinical trials, six observational studies, and three nonrandomized trials. Novel interventions for STSG-DS management included in this article describe applications of human amniotic membranes, acellular dermal matrices, cell suspensions and growth factors, biomaterials, electromagnetic radiation, and natural products. Conclusion: Various interventions have shown promise for STSG-DS management since the creation of the 2018 international guidelines; however, studies with more standardized protocols and endpoints are needed to produce up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations and improve outcomes for patients undergoing split-thickness skin grafting.
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.