Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40904913›Full record

ReviewCanadian prosthetics & orthotics journal2025

Wound management, healing, and early prosthetic rehabilitation: Part 3 - A scoping review of chemical biomarkers.

H Williams-Reid, A Johannesson, A Buis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

H Williams-ReidDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland.
A JohannessonÖssur Clinics EMEA, Stockholm, Sweden.
A BuisDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3947-293X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor post-amputation healing delays prosthetic fitting, adversely affecting mortality, quality of life, and cardiovascular health. Current residual limb assessments are subjective and lack standardized guidelines, emphasizing the need for objective biomarkers to improve healing and prosthesis readiness assessments.

objectivesThis review aimed to identify predictive, diagnostic, and indicative chemical biomarkers of healing of the tissues and structures found in the residual limbs of adults with amputation. METHODOLOGY: This scoping review followed Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Searches using the terms "biomarkers," "wound healing," and "amputation" were performed across Web of Science, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, PubMed, and CINAHL databases. Inclusion criteria were: 1) References to chemical biomarkers and healing; 2) Residuum tissue healing; 3) Repeatable methodology with ethical approval. Included articles were evaluated for quality of evidence (QualSyst tool) and level of evidence (JBI classification). Sources were categorized by study (e.g., randomized controlled trial or bench research), wound (diabetic, amputation, other), and model (human, murine, other) type. Chemical biomarkers repeated across study categories, and quantification methods were reported on.

findingsFrom 3,306 titles and abstracts screened, 646 underwent full-text review, and 203 met the criteria for data extraction, with 76% classified as strong quality. 38 chemical biomarkers were identified across 4 to 50 sources, with interleukins (predictive, indicative, and diagnostic) and HbA1c (predictive) most prevalent, appearing in 50 and 48 sources, respectively. Other biomarkers included predictive blood markers (e.g., cholesterol, white blood cell counts), indicative growth factors, bacteria presence (predictive), proteins (predictive, indicative, and diagnostic, e.g., matrix metalloproteinases), and cellular markers (indicative and diagnostic, e.g., Ki-67, alpha-smooth muscle actin [α-SMA]).

conclusionPredictive biomarkers identify comorbidities that may hinder healing, aiding in pre-amputation risk assessment for poor recovery. Indicative biomarkers monitor key biological healing processes, such as angiogenesis (the formation of new blood vessels), wound contraction, and inflammation. Diagnostic biomarkers provide direct insights into tissue composition and cellular-level healing. Integrating these biomarkers into post-amputation assessments enables continuous monitoring of the healing process while accounting for comorbidities, enhancing the objectivity of post-surgical healing management and ensuring more effective, personalized rehabilitation strategies.

Indexed as

AmputationChemical BiomarkersChemical Markers of HealingEarly Prosthetic RehabilitationResidual Limb HealingResiduum HealingScoping ReviewSurgical Site HealingWound HealingWound Management

Identifiers

PMID40904913
PMCPMC12404354

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.