ArticleInternational wound journal2026
Results of the Use of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Donor Site of Split-Thickness Skin Grafts: An Exploratory Cohort Study.
Article in International wound journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Split-thickness skin autografts are commonly used to treat extensive cutaneous defects. However, donor site morbidity, including pain, bleeding, and delayed epithelialization, remains a major clinical challenge. This study evaluates whether applying autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to the donor site improves healing outcomes. A prospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary-level academic hospital in Colombia. The study protocol was approved by the local Institutional Ethics Committee. Adult patients (> 18 years) undergoing split-thickness skin grafts for trauma, burns, oncologic resections, or chronic ulcers were included. Two groups were compared: the PRP group, in which autologous platelet-rich plasma was applied to the donor site, and the control group, which received standard wound care. The primary outcome was the quality of epithelialization at the donor site, while pain, assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale, was evaluated as a secondary outcome at multiple postoperative time points. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and linear mixed-effects models adjusted for potential confounders, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. A total of 46 patients were included (16 in the PRP group and 30 in the control group), with no significant demographic differences between groups. The PRP group demonstrated improved epithelialization quality, with lower Vancouver Scar Scale scores on postoperative days 7 and 14 (p < 0.05). Patients treated with PRP also reported a reduction of up to 50% in postoperative pain during early assessments (p < 0.001). These effects were maintained throughout the follow-up period, suggesting a sustained benefit of PRP on both healing quality and pain control. These findings suggest that autologous PRP application at split-thickness skin graft donor sites may enhance early epithelialization quality and reduce postoperative pain compared with standard wound care. PRP appears to be safe and may represent a useful adjunct to promote improved wound healing and patient recovery in reconstructive surgery. However, larger randomised controlled trials are required to confirm these findings and to establish the clinical effectiveness of autologous PRP in this setting.
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.