ReviewJPRAS open2026
Reused skin grafts for treating hidradenitis suppurativa: A systematic review.
Review in JPRAS open, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic, relapsing inflammatory disease in which wide excision remains the most reliable option for durable disease control in moderate to severe cases. Reconstruction after excision is challenging. Reused or recycled split-thickness skin grafts, harvested from excised HS tissue and reapplied after processing, have been proposed to reduce donor-site morbidity, but their clinical value remains uncertain. Objective: To systematically evaluate the outcomes of reused skin grafts following surgical excision of HS, with emphasis on recurrence, graft take and procedure-related morbidity. Methods: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar from inception to the final search date. Studies reporting HS excision followed by reused or recycled skin grafting were included. Outcomes of interest were recurrence, graft survival, complications and follow-up duration. Given heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was performed. Risk of bias was assessed using design-appropriate tools. Results: Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria, including five systematic reviews, two retrospective cohorts and nine case reports or small case series. Primary reused-graft reports comprised approximately 41 patients with follow-up ranging from 6 to 113 months. Across these series, no surgical-site recurrences were reported (0/41), corresponding to an exact 95% confidence interval of 0-7.0%. Complications were generally minor. However, in the largest reused-graft series, which included 18 patients, 8 (44%) required supplemental conventional donor grafts. Broader pooled estimates from conventional graft literature reported recurrence rates ranging from 2% to 18%, reflecting substantial heterogeneity. Conclusions: Reused skin grafting appears feasible and safe in selected HS patients, with encouraging short- to medium-term durability. Current evidence supports feasibility rather than definitive comparative effectiveness, underscoring the need for well-designed prospective studies.
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.