ReviewEuropean burn journal2025
Laboratory-Generated Autologous Skin Substitutes for Burn Treatment in Europe: Narrative Review, Experts' Opinion, and Legal Considerations.
Review in European burn journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cellularized Skin Substitute Bioengineering for Regenerative Medicine: Cell Sources, Culture Strategies, and Transition Toward Defined, Xeno-Free Culture Systems.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Biomimetic Dermal Substitutes for Skin Reconstruction: Advances in Scaffold Design, Biological Integration, and Clinical Performance.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- A Narrative Review of Advances in Skin Tissue Engineering: From Physiological Architecture to 3D Bioprinting.Cureus · 2026Review
- RNA Coding and Transcriptional Regulation in Skin Repair: Insights from Single-Cell Profiling and Implications for Organoid-Based Regenerative Strategies.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Autologous skin substitutes represent a promising advancement in the treatment of burn injuries, offering personalized solutions for patients with extensive skin loss. This white paper synthesizes the current knowledge on laboratory-generated autologous skin substitutes in Europe, incorporating expert opinions and legal considerations. The white paper examines the scientific principles underlying autologous skin substitute development, including cell sourcing, bioengineering techniques, and clinical applications. The regulatory framework governing the production and use of these advanced therapies in Europe is also examined, highlighting challenges in standardization, safety, and approval pathways. The text features expert insights that offer a real-world perspective on the clinical viability and translational hurdles of autologous skin substitutes. The findings highlight the potential of autologous skin substitutes to improve burn treatment outcomes while emphasizing the need for harmonized regulations to facilitate clinical implementation. Despite technological advancements, significant challenges persist, including production costs, scalability, and long-term efficacy. Another focus of this white paper are the legal changes, which have significantly impacted the production and availability of these technologies. The review concludes that while autologous skin substitutes hold great promise, further research, regulatory refinement, and interdisciplinary collaboration are essential to optimize their integration into clinical practice.
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.