Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42078210›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in physiology2026

Establishment and translational evaluation of animal models for skin wound healing: a systematic review.

Ying Zhang, Kai Leng, Miao Dong, Jinxuan Wu, Zi Wang, Qiao Zhu, Xinghua Gao, Yan Sun

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ying ZhangDepartment of Dermatology, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Kai LengDepartment of Dermatology, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Miao DongDepartment of Dermatology, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Jinxuan WuDepartment of Dermatology, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Zi WangDepartment of Dermatology, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Qiao ZhuDepartment of Dermatology, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Xinghua GaoDepartment of Dermatology, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Yan SunDepartment of Dermatology, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Skin wounds, encompassing acute injuries and chronic refractory ulcers, impose substantial physical and economic burdens globally. While animal models are indispensable for dissecting wound healing pathophysiology and testing therapeutic interventions, the discordance between preclinical findings and clinical outcomes remains a critical challenge. Methods: To provide a standardized reference for model selection, we conducted a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We comprehensively searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2025. Inclusion criteria focused on Results: A total of 129 studies met the inclusion criteria and were synthesized. We systematically categorized and evaluated mainstream models: (1) Acute wounds: Rodent incisional/excisional models facilitate high-throughput screening but are limited by contraction-dominant healing, whereas rabbit ear models better approximate human re-epithelialization. (2) Chronic wounds: Streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetic models in mice and rats predominate but often lack the macrovascular complications of human ulcers, necessitating novel composite models incorporating ischemia and biofilm infection. (3) Pathological scarring: Tension-induced models (e.g., suture anchoring, mechanical stretching) are identified as critical for studying mechanotransduction pathways (e.g., YAP/TAZ) absent in traditional unstressed models. Furthermore, our review identifies a pervasive male bias in study design. We highlight that sex steroids critically modulate inflammation and angiogenesis-with estrogen typically promoting and androgens delaying repair-necessitating the inclusion of both sexes or specific hormone-depleted models (e.g., ovariectomized females) to improve clinical predictive value. Conclusion: No single animal model perfectly recapitulates human cutaneous repair. Based on the synthesis of 129 studies, we propose a hierarchical translational framework: utilizing genetically tractable mice for mechanistic discovery, rats for longitudinal pharmacological screening, and rabbits or porcine models for the validation of scar quality and epithelial closure prior to clinical trials.

Indexed as

animal modelsdiabeticreviewskin wound healingtranslational research

Identifiers

PMID42078210
PMCPMC13128434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.