ArticleCureus2025
Biological Skin Substitutes in Pressure Ulcers: High-Purity Type I Collagen-Based Versus Amnion/Chorion Membrane.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 6 registered trials, which are not on this 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.
A Multicentric Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing the Use of High Purity Type-I Collagen-Based Skin Substitute vs. Dehydrated Human Amnion/Chorion Membrane in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers
Regenerative High Purity Type I Collagen Scaffold for Breast Cancer Excision Repair and Reconstruction: A Prospective Multicenter Clinical Trial
A Randomized Controlled Trial of High-Purity Type-I Collagen-Based Biomaterial (Surgicoll-Mesh®) as a Peritoneal Substitute to Prevent Post-Peritonectomy Complications in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery
A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating High-Purity Type I Collagen Wrap Around Extensor Tendon Repair Sites in Zones VI-VIII of the Hand to Prevent Adhesions and Improve Functional Outcomes
Prospective Multicentre Registry of High-Purity Type I Collagen Nerve Wrapping in Peripheral Nerve Procedures: Early Clinical Outcomes
A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Assessor-Blinded, Three-Arm Clinical Trial Comparing Fibrillar Type-I Collagen Haemostat, Bone Wax, and Standardized Compression for Control of Cancellous Bone Marrow Bleeding Following Single-Ray Amputation
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Review
- Article
- Article
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
backgroundPressure ulcers (PUs) present a therapeutic challenge in bedridden or neurologically impaired patients and represent a significant healthcare burden, affecting millions of patients worldwide. Current standard treatment approaches often fall short in achieving optimal healing outcomes, necessitating the development of advanced therapeutic interventions. Biological skin substitutes - high-purity type I collagen (HPTC) and dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane (dHACM) - have emerged as promising therapeutic alternatives to traditional wound care approaches. This study compares their effectiveness in treating stage III-IV PUs.
methodsThis prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label, two parallel group, single-centre clinical trial was conducted at Adichunchanagiri Institute of Medical Sciences, a tertiary care hospital in India, specializing in wound care and reconstructive surgery. We conducted a parallel group, open-label, randomized controlled trial with 80 patients (n = 40 per group) with stage III or IV PUs randomized 1:1 to receive either HPTC (Helicoll
resultsThe HPTCgroup demonstrated superior outcomes with 30 patients (75%) having complete wound closure compared to 25 patients (62.5%) in the dHACM group (p = 0.234). Mean percentage wound closure was 78.5% ± 18.2% for HPTC versus 65.1% ± 9.8% for dHACM (p < 0.05). HPTCshowed enhanced vascular infiltration (Grade 3: 31 patients (77.5%) vs. eight patients (20%) (p < 0.001)), improved neo-epithelialization (Grade 3: 28 patients (70%) vs. nine patients (22.5%) (p < 0.001)), and increased fibroblast activity (Grade 3: 33 patients (82.5%) vs. seven patients (17.5%) (p < 0.001)) at day 5. The HPTCgroup required fewer reapplications (0.85 ± 0.92 vs. 1.15 ± 0.87, p = 0.127). No serious adverse events were reported in either group. Adverse events were minor and similar between groups. The HPTC group demonstrated superior outcomes with 29 patients (72.5%) showing improved patient satisfaction compared to 17 patients (42.5%) in the dHACM group.
conclusionHelicoll
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.