SynthesisWound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society
Stem Cell-Based and Stem Cell-Related Regenerative Therapies for Pure Venous Ulcers: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous systematic reviews of stem cell-based therapies for lower limb ulcers have largely focused on arterial, diabetic or mixed-aetiology ulcers, while evidence in strictly defined pure venous ulcers remains scarce. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy and safety of stem cell-based and stem cell-related regenerative therapies for pure venous ulcers. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched up to February 2026 for comparative clinical studies. Studies involving arterial, diabetic, mixed or non-venous ulcers, non-comparative designs or insufficiently extractable data were excluded. Three studies involving 43 patients were included, comprising two randomised controlled trials and one non-randomised comparative study. Interventions included autologous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells in fibrin spray, hair follicle-containing punch grafts and antlerogenic stem cell extract. In one randomised double-blind pilot trial, mesenchymal stem cells in fibrin spray accelerated linear healing by approximately 10-fold compared with saline spray and fibrin spray alone (p < 0.01). Another randomised trial found greater ulcer area reduction at 18 weeks in hair follicle-treated areas than in control areas (75.15% [SD 23.03] vs. 33.07% [SD 46.17], p = 0.002). The non-randomised study reported significant improvements in wound area, circumference and healing-related indices, although Ki-67 expression did not differ significantly. No major treatment-related safety concerns were reported, although adverse-event data were limited. Current evidence suggests potential benefit, but findings remain preliminary because of small samples, heterogeneous interventions and variable outcome definitions. Larger standardised studies are needed. Trial Registration: CRD420261304878.
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.