ReviewDermatology practical & conceptual2025
Omega-3 Acellular Fish Skin Grafts for Chronic and Complicated Wounds: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety.
Review in Dermatology practical & conceptual, 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.
- The use of intact fish skin grafts in the treatment of acute complicated bite wounds: a case report.Journal of surgical case reports · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA systematic review was conducted to investigate the efficacy of acellular fish skin grafts (AFSGs) for the treatment of complicated wounds. AFSGs can be used as a regenerative and antimicrobial tool for healing complicated wounds, but clinical evidence remains unclear.
objectiveThis systematic review aimed to summarize the efficacy of AFSGs on complicated wounds using evidence from existing published studies.
methodsElectronic databases like PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for relevant literature reporting on the efficacy of AFSGs for wound healing. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, nine studies were selected for data extraction. The quality of the articles was evaluated using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools.
resultsExisting evidence shows that AFSGs accelerate wound healing, reduce pain, prevent antibiotic administration, and cause no autoimmune reactions. The total re-epithelialization time for diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) was observed as 15 ± 8 weeks, depending on the severity of the ulcers. Acute full thickness biopsy wounds healed within 3.75 ± 0.25 weeks. As reported in papers, AFSGs showed significantly better effects than standard-of-care therapy, collagen alginate dressings, dehydrated human AMNION/chorion membrane, and/ or porcine small-intestine submucosa. However, instances of rashes, erythema, pain, and hypergranulation were reported when AFSGs were applied to biopsy wounds.
conclusionOverall, the evidence obtained in this systematic review indicates that AFSGs represent a clinically and financially effective option for the treatment of wounds when compared with conventional alternatives.
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.