Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Chronic Wound Management: From Gauze to Homologous Cellular Matrix

Popescu V., Cauni V., Petrutescu MS., Rustin MM., Bocai R., Turculet CR.

Narrative Review on Chronic Wound, published in Biomedicines (2023) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • 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
Narrative Review
Journal
Biomedicines (2023)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
37760898
PMCID
PMC10525626
DOI
10.3390/biomedicines11092457
Citations
24

Abstract (original English)

Background Chronic wounds are a significant health problem with devastating consequences for patients' physical, social, and mental health, increasing healthcare systems' costs. Their prolonged healing times, economic burden, diminished quality of life, increased infection risk, and impact on patients' mobility and functionality make them a major concern for healthcare professionals. Purpose This review offers a multi-perspective analysis of the medical literature focusing on chronic wound management. Methods used We evaluated 48 articles from the last 21 years registered in the MEDLINE and Global Health databases. The articles included in our study had a minimum of 20 citations, patients > 18 years old, and focused on chronic, complex, and hard-to-heal wounds. Extracted data were summarized into a narrative synthesis using the same health-related quality of life instrument. Results We evaluated the efficacy of existing wound care therapies from classical methods to modern concepts, and wound care products to regenerative medicine that uses a patient's pluripotent stem cells and growth factors. Regenerative medicine and stem cell therapies, biologic dressings and scaffolds, negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), electrical stimulation, topical growth factors and cytokines, hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), advanced wound dressings, artificial intelligence (AI), and digital wou

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research