Trial reportInternational wound journal2026
Intent to Treat Analysis of the Primary and Secondary Outcomes for the ODINN Intact Fish Skin Graft for Deep Diabetic Foot Wounds Trial.
Trial report in International wound journal, 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.
- Evaluation of Acellular Intact Fish Skin Grafts for Treating Acute and Chronic Wounds.International wound journal · 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
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is a significant need for trials that evaluate the treatment of University of Texas (UT) grade 2 and 3 diabetic foot ulcers (bone, joint, or tendon exposed wounds). We undertook a trial looking at the effect of intact fish skin graft (IFSG) on these deep and difficult-to-heal ulcers. 262 patients Intent to Treat (ITT) patients with UT grade 2 and 3 DFUs were randomised to receive intact fish skin graft (IFSG) or a standardised treatment (SOC) that adhered to the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidelines. The secondary endpoints that were measured included wound area reduction (WAR), healing rates at 20 and 24 weeks; closure rates by UT grade, perfusion, quality of life, pain reduction and IFSG safety. We report ITT (all randomised) (mITT previosly reported) The (WAR) at 12 weeks was 65.53% for IFSG versus 30.82% for SOC (p = 0.007). UT 2 wounds (60% of total) exhibited a closure rate of 47% versus 23% at 16 weeks for IFSG versus SOC (p = 0.0033). Target wound infections were comparable (39 vs. 37) and major outcomes were comparable during the 24 week period (target-limb amputations 8% vs. 7%). Time-to-heal favoured IFSG (restricted mean to 24 weeks 17.31 vs. 19.37 weeks; KM/log-rank significant; Cox HR 1.59). The in the treatment of deep complex diabetic foot wounds the addition of IFSG significantly improved the number of patients with total wound closure as well as the time to wound closure without increased risk of complications. This improvement in total wound closure and time to wound closure was noted across prior amputation status, quality of perfusion, and UT grade.
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.