ReviewAnimal models and experimental medicine2026
Recent advances in animal models for pathological scar research: A comprehensive review of experimental approaches and translational relevance.
Review in Animal models and experimental medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stand-Alone Carboxytherapy Followed by Consolidation with Oral Hydrolyzed Marine Collagen Fragments: A Potential Sequential Bioregenerative Strategy for Hypertrophic Scars: A Case Report.International medical case reports journal · 2026Article
- Recent advances in animal models for pathological scar research: A comprehensive review of experimental approaches and translational relevance.Animal models and experimental medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pathological scarring, manifested in the form of hypertrophic scars (HTS) and keloid scars (KS), represents a major clinical challenge due to its aesthetic and functional implications for patients. Understanding the molecular mechanisms involved in these types of scars and developing effective treatments requires the use of controlled experimental models, especially animals, to overcome the limitations of clinical studies. The aim of this sistematic review is to critically analyze the animal models used in the last five years (2020-2025) for the study of pathological scars, highlighting their advantages, limitations and applicability in the development of new therapeutic strategies. Murine, rabbit and porcine models, as well as alternative models, offer varied perspectives on the formation and treatment of HTS and KS, with an emphasis on histological and molecular correlations with human pathology. By synthesizing recent data, the paper highlights the essential role of preclinical research in optimizing antifibrotic treatments and in advancing the translation of data into the clinical sphere. Overall, animal models remain essential for bridging mechanistic insights with clinical translation, supporting the development of more effective and personalized anti-scar therapies.
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.