SynthesisInternational wound journal2025
Cold Atmospheric Pressure Plasma in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cold Atmospheric Plasma Enhances Fn14 Signaling in Hair Follicle Stem Cells, Thereby Promoting the Healing of Diabetic Skin Wounds in a Mouse Model.Journal of immunology research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cold atmospheric pressure plasma (CAPP) is an innovative energy-based therapy which has gained momentum in recent years for its wide array of therapeutic applications. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of CAPPs in treating diabetic foot ulcers. We conducted systematic literature searches on Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Clinicaltrials.gov using PRISMA guidelines. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies conducted on patients with diabetic foot ulcers in which CAPP therapy was compared with a control treatment. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Four RCTs from two countries analysing a total of 153 patients were included in the review. Three studies reported a significant reduction in ulcer area in the CAPP group, one study reported a significant decrease in inflammatory markers, and mixed results were reported regarding the reduction of bacterial load. All studies reported no adverse side effects or concerns with the safety profile of CAPP. Current evidence supports CAPP's potential as safe and effective adjunctive therapy that may accelerate wound healing, reduce wound size, promote tissue regeneration and lower infection risks. However, the limited number and size of trials, variability in treatment protocols and short follow-up periods highlight the preliminary nature of these findings. Further large-scale, well-designed studies with standardised protocols and long-term follow-up are needed to confirm CAPP's efficacy and safety, as well as to determine its cost-effectiveness in diverse healthcare settings.
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.