SynthesisActa cirurgica brasileira2026
Effectiveness of negative-pressure wound therapy in partial-thickness and full-thickness burns: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the effectiveness of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in healing partial- and full-thickness burns in humans.
methodsThis systematic review followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA checklist.
resultsEight studies published between 2014 and 2024 were included, involving 466 patients with partial- and full-thickness burns. The sample comprised five randomized controlled trials, two retrospective observational studies, and one prospective cohort study. NPWT was applied in continuous or intermittent modes, with pressures ranging from 40 to 125 mmHg. The most frequently assessed outcome was re-epithelialization time, with NPWT superiority reported in three studies. NPWT was also associated with greater reduction in wound area and bacterial load. Additional outcomes included pain, graft integration, and scar quality, as well as logistical advantages such as reduced dressing change frequency.
conclusionNPWT provides benefits in burn treatment, including reduction of wound area, bacterial count, and re-epithelialization time, along with effectiveness in graft integration and healing quality. Despite limitations, such as application difficulties and prolonged treatment in pediatric patients, NPWT stands out for decreasing dressing changes, improving care logistics and psychological well-being.
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.