Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Advancements in cell-based therapies for thermal burn wounds: a comprehensive systematic review of clinical trials outcomes

Yassaghi Y., Nazerian Y., Niazi F., Niknejad H.

Systematic Review with a reported sample of 970 on Chronic Wound, Burns, published in Stem Cell Res Ther (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Systematic Review
Journal
Stem Cell Res Ther (2024)
Reported sample size
970
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
39227861
PMCID
PMC11373270
DOI
10.1186/s13287-024-03901-2
Citations
17

Abstract (original English)

Background Burn trauma is one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The standard management of burn wounds consists of early debridement, dressing changes, surgical management, and split-thickness skin autografts (STSGs). However, there are limitations for the standard management that inclines us to find alternative treatment approaches, such as innovative cell-based therapies. We aimed to systematically review the different aspects of cell-based treatment approaches for burn wounds in clinical trials. Methods A systematic search through PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was carried out using a combination of keywords, including "Cell transplantation", "Fibroblast", "Keratinocyte", "Melanocyte", or "Stem Cell" with "Burn", "Burn wound", or "Burn injury". Firstly, titles and abstracts of the studies existing in these databases until "February 2024" were screened. Then, the selected studies were read thoroughly, and considering the inclusion and exclusion criteria, final articles were included in this systematic review. Moreover, a manual search was performed through the reference lists of the included studies to minimize the risk of missing reports. Results Overall, 30 clinical trials with 970 patients were included in our study. Considering the type of cells, six studies used keratinocytes, nine used fibroblasts, eight used combined ker

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
KeratinocytesHumansBurnsMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationSkin TransplantationWound HealingClinical Trials as TopicCell- and Tissue-Based Therapy

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research