ArticleInternational wound journal2025
Comparison between artificial dermis with split-thickness skin graft and full-thickness skin graft for reconstruction of joint-involved burn wounds: A retrospective review from a tertiary burn centre.
Article in International wound journal, 2025. 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.
- Article
- [Efficacy of artificial dermis in repairing small to medium-sized deep partial-thickness scalds in infants and young children].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2025Observational
- Comparison between artificial dermis with split-thickness skin graft and full-thickness skin graft for reconstruction of joint-involved burn wounds: A retrospective review from a tertiary burn centre.International wound journal · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to compare the scar quality and recovery rate of joint activity for patients with joint-involved burn injuries receiving either artificial dermis (AD) with split-thickness skin graft (STSG) or full-thickness skin graft (FTSG) for reconstruction. The primary outcomes were %skin graft (SG) take. Secondary outcomes included complications such as the infection rate and donor site morbidity, 12-month scar quality evaluated using the Vancouver scar scale (VSS), recovery rate of joint activity and incidence of scar contracture requiring further revision. Twenty-eight patients between 1 August 2021, and 1 August 2023, were enrolled. Twelve patients received AD-STSG while the other 16 patients underwent FTSG for reconstruction. The median %SG take was 95.0% (interquartile range [IQR] 6.3%) and 96.0% (IQR 10.0%) for the AD-STSG and FTSG groups (p = 0.71). The FTSG group had significantly better 12-month scar quality (median VSS 4.0 [IQR 1.3] vs. 6.0 [IQR1.5], p < 0.01) and recovery rate of joint activity (median 82.5% [IQT 15.0%] vs. 70.0% [IQR 7.5%], p < 0.01) compared with AD-STSG group. However, two patients in the FTSG group (12.5%) suffered partial wound dehiscence of the donor site, whereas no patients experienced donor site morbidity in the AD-STSG group (p = 0.49). The incidence of scar contracture requiring further revision was 25.0% (3/12) in the AD-STSG group and 12.5% (2/16) in the FTSG group (p = 0.62). In conclusion, AD-STSG could be an alternative treatment over FTSG for larger joint-involved burn wounds (>200 cm
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.