ReviewWound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society
Porcine Wound Models: The Gold Standard for Translational Research in Cutaneous Healing.
Review in Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Porcine wound models are central to translational cutaneous repair research because porcine skin reproduces many structural and healing features of human skin and supports clinically relevant wound sizes, sampling strategies and device testing. This review summarises the historical development and current use of major porcine wound platforms including incisional, partial-thickness, full-thickness, infected, chronic-like, diabetic, ischaemic, burn, pressure ulcer, hypertrophic scar and radiation models, with emphasis on methodological rigour, translational strengths and study-specific limitations. We further highlight how spatially resolved molecular profiling, longitudinal imaging and integrated transcriptomic datasets are expanding mechanistic interrogation of porcine wounds and may support development of AI-enabled analytic frameworks when linked to well-annotated healing outcomes. Emerging humanised and genetically engineered swine provide additional opportunities to model human-specific immune or comorbidity contexts, although broader validation remains necessary. Key challenges remain the difficulty of sustaining chronicity in otherwise healthy animals, inter-study variability in wound generation and reporting and the need to align preclinical endpoints with clinically meaningful outcomes. Overall, porcine models remain the most clinically relevant large-animal platforms for bridging mechanistic wound-healing studies and late-stage preclinical therapeutic evaluation.
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.