ArticleJPRAS open2026
Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix (BTM) resilience to wound infection: A consecutive case series.
Article in JPRAS open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Unknown Benefits of Dermal Matrices in Prevent Loss of Albumin in Patient with Major Burns.European burn journal · 2026Article
- Safety of Ovine Forestomach Matrix Across 474 Soft Tissue Defects: Interim Results from the Prospective Multicenter MASTRR Registry.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix for Facial Reconstruction Following Mohs Micrographic Surgery: A Multi-Subunit Analysis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
PolyNovo® Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix (BTM) has gained favor for reconstructing non-graftable wound beds amid suggestions it is inherently resistant to infection. Evidence is limited to multiple case series and currently the rates of BTM colonization, infection and loss remain unestablished. We report our case series which includes a diverse case-mix of complex wounds successfully reconstructed with BTM, with a novel focus on the rate of infection and related microbiology profile. Our case series included all patients treated with BTM at Southmead Hospital between October 2021 and November 2023. In our cohort, 22 patients had their wounds reconstructed with BTM. Microbiological growth was observed in 76 % of available pre-BTM swabs and subsequently only 14 % (3/22) of all patients experienced clinical infection of BTM. In the case of infection, 66 % (2/3) of patients had successful salvage of BTM. Only one patient (5 %) in the cohort experienced partial BTM loss, with the remainder achieving total wound healing at 3 months. Our study makes a case that microbiological wound swabs prior to BTM application is of limited clinical value. In our experience, salvage techniques can be applied empirically in the case of clinical infection and the vast majority of patients will have successful integration of the BTM.
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.