ArticleTzu chi medical journal
Autologous fat grafting and adipose-derived stem cells therapy for acute burns and burn-related scar: A systematic review.
Article in Tzu chi medical journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07186322 (Fat Grafting in Upper Limb Burns Scars), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Fat Grafting in Upper Limb Burns Scars: a Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Elliptical Lipoaspirate Activation Versus Coleman Technique: A Randomized Double-Blinded Clinical Trial on Adipose Tissue Grafting for Scar Treatment.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Trial
- Multimodal Reconstructive Treatment of the Face and Scalp Following Catastrophic Burn Injury: An Eight-Year Experience with Structural Fat Grafting, Follicular Unit Excision Hair Transplantation, and Scalp Micropigmentation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Advancing fat graft survival: from adipose-derived stem cell mechanisms to next-generation regenerative strategies.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Integrated single-cell RNA-seq and bulk RNA-seq analysis to investigate key adipogenesis genes in adipose-derived stem cells.PloS one · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to analyze all available research on the application of autologous fat grafting (AFG) and adipose-derived stem cells (ADSC) to present evidence-based recommendations, particularly in the clinical treatment of acute burns and burn-related scars. Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, COCHRANE, and EMBASE, as well as a manual search of previous reviews' reference lists up. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I, where appropriate. Results: Six eligible studies were selected (2 randomized clinical trials [RCT], 1 retrospective cohort, and 3 experimental studies) with subjects ranging from 3 to 100. Only one study evaluated the use of AFG for acute burns. Improvements in wound healing, vascularization, scar characteristics, and tissue architecture were generally observed in some studies, supported by molecular markers, while one study reported nonsignificant results. Subjective patient satisfaction was reported to have improved. Functional outcomes improvement in the treated regions was minimal. However, study heterogeneity arose mainly from treatment protocols. Cautious results interpretation due to potential bias, especially in selection and confounding domains, and limited clinical trials are important to note. More studies are needed to evaluate. Conclusion: AFG and ADSC hold potential as valuable treatment options for burn-related scars, supported by a body of evidence, but further well-designed RCT are needed. The efficacy of acute burn settings is yet to be further evaluated since evidence is limited.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.