Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33467167›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021

Regenerative Approaches and Future Trends for the Treatment of Corneal Burn Injuries.

Gabriele Saccu, Valeria Menchise, Cristina Giordano, Daniela Delli Castelli, Walter Dastrù, Rinaldo Pellicano, Emanuela Tolosano, Phuc Van Pham, Fiorella Altruda, Sharmila Fagoonee

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
10.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Innovative stem cell-based strategies for corneal wound healing: A step forward.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Gabriele SaccuDepartment of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, Molecular Biotechnology Center, University of Turin, 10126 Turin, Italy.
Valeria MenchiseInstitute of Biostructure and Bioimaging, National Research Council, Molecular Biotechnology Center, 10126 Turin, Italy.
Cristina GiordanoOphthalmology Veterinary Practice, c.so Galileo Ferraris 121, 10126 Turin, Italy.
Daniela Delli CastelliDepartment of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, Molecular Biotechnology Center, University of Turin, 10126 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1806-3141
Walter DastrùDepartment of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, Molecular Biotechnology Center, University of Turin, 10126 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5757-7749
Rinaldo PellicanoUnit of Gastroenterology, Molinette Hospital, 10126 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3438-0649
Emanuela TolosanoDepartment of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, Molecular Biotechnology Center, University of Turin, 10126 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1622-2340
Phuc Van PhamLaboratory of Stem Cell Research and Application, and Stem Cell Institute, VNUHCM University of Science, Ho Chi Minh City 08000, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0001-7254-0717
Fiorella AltrudaDepartment of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, Molecular Biotechnology Center, University of Turin, 10126 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6238-1860
Sharmila FagooneeInstitute of Biostructure and Bioimaging, National Research Council, Molecular Biotechnology Center, 10126 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6070-6716
University of Turin · ITInstitute of Biostructure and Bioimaging · ITFondazione Ricerca Molinette · ITVietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City · VN

Funding

Consorzio interuniversitario per Biotecnologie N/AProgetti di ricerca di Rilevante Interesse Nazionale 201572SHXJRegione Piemonte EV-ER Piattaforma Tecnologica "Salute e BenessereRegione Piemonte POR-FES 2014-2020 - Poli di Innovazione (EPATOCARE)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ocular chemical and thermal burns are frequent causes of hospitalization and require immediate interventions and care. Various surgical and pharmacological treatment strategies are employed according to damage severity. Controlling inflammation and neovascularization while promoting normal ocular surface anatomy and function restoration is the principal aim. In the most severe cases, when epithelial healing is severely affected, reconstruction of the ocular surface may be a valid option, which, however, requires expertise, adequate instruments, and qualified donors. Numerous endogenous and exogenous strategies have been considered for corneal repair. Among these, stem cells and their derivatives have offered numerous attractive possibilities in finding an effective way in stimulating corneal regeneration. Limbal epithelial stem cells and mesenchymal cells from the ocular tissue as well as from various sources have demonstrated their effectiveness in dampening neovascularization, scarring, and inflammation, while promoting epithelialization of the injured cornea. Moreover, a plethora of cytokines and growth factors, and extracellular vesicles, which constitute the secretome of these cells, work in concert to enhance wound healing. In this review, we provide an update on the recent potential therapeutic avenues and clinical applications of stem cells and their products in corneal regeneration after burn injury, as well as current imaging strategies for monitoring therapeutic efficacy and damage resolution.

Indexed as

burn injurycorneaextracellular vesiclesimagingstem cellswound healing

Identifiers

PMID33467167
PMCPMC7830803
OpenAlexW3124226930

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.