ArticleJPRAS open2026
Occlusive dressings for fingertip amputations: Clinical outcomes, pulp regeneration, and dermatoglyphic recovery.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Forgotten Healer: The Role of Adipose Tissue in Spontaneous Healing After Free Flap Finger Reconstruction.Journal of personalized medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the clinical and functional outcomes of fingertip reconstruction with conservative treatment using occlusive dressings up to zone 3. Patients and methods: A retrospective monocentric study was conducted on 26 patients (28 fingers) who presented an amputation in zones 1, 2, or 3, treated with occlusive dressings. The evaluation included epidemiological data on the trauma, the number of dressings required, healing time, satisfaction, recovery of sensation, regeneration of dermatoglyphs, pulp trophicity, complications, and functional scores. Results: At a mean follow-up of 11.8 months, healing was achieved in 4.2 weeks after an average of four dressings. Pulp trophicity was excellent or good in 96.4 % of cases. Finger mobility was fully preserved in 89.3 % of fingers. Complete or partial dermatoglyphic regeneration was observed in all patients. Sensitivity tested by Weber's test was reduced by 24 % (4.6 mm vs. 3.5 mm contralateral). Nail dystrophies were noted in 60.4 % of fingers, mainly following amputations in zone 3. Cold intolerance was reported in 35.7 % of fingers. Functional scores confirmed satisfactory recovery. Satisfaction was high. The most frequently reported inconvenience was odor occasionally reported despite the use of charcoal dressings. Conclusion: Occlusive dressings represent a reliable, non-invasive, and reproducible alternative in fingertip amputations in zones 1 and 2. Despite limitations in zone 3, the aesthetic and functional outcomes justify its use as a first-line treatment. Dermatoglyphic regeneration is a real phenomenon, with both functional and legal implications. These results support occlusive dressing as a first-line management option for selected fingertip amputations.
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.