ArticleJPRAS open2026
Human acellular dermal matrix versus Integra® for single-stage oncologic scalp reconstruction: A multicentre cohort study.
Article 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Reconstruction of scalp defects after oncologic resection remains challenging because of limited tissue mobility and frequent periosteal involvement. In elderly or frail patients, complex procedures such as large local flaps or free tissue transfer carry significant morbidity. Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) offer an alternative for single-stage wound coverage. This multicentre study compared a tissue bank-manufactured human ADM with the commercial dermal regeneration template Integra®. Methods: A multicentre observational study was conducted between January 2023 and June 2025 at two university hospitals. Sixteen patients underwent scalp reconstruction after excision of nonmelanoma skin cancer: six received cadaveric human ADM and ten Integra®. The primary outcome was time to complete epithelialization. Secondary outcomes included graft integration, postoperative complications, operative time, and material cost. Results: All grafts integrated successfully, with no failures. Mean healing time was shorter with ADM (1.8 ± 0.3 months) than with Integra® (3.5 ± 1.4 months; mean difference 1.7 months, 95% CI 0.48-2.92; p = 0.01; Cohen's d = 1.54). One postoperative infection occurred in the ADM group and resolved with oral antibiotics; none occurred with Integra®. Operative times were comparable. Material cost was approximately 72% lower with tissue bank-derived ADM (€500 vs. €1,759 per reconstruction). Conclusions: In this multicentre pilot study, single-stage scalp reconstruction using tissue bank-manufactured human ADM achieved successful graft integration, faster healing, and substantially lower material cost than Integra®. Given the small sample size (n = 16) and observational design, these findings should be considered preliminary and hypothesis-generating.
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.