ReviewJPRAS open2025
Efficacy and safety of combined negative pressure therapy after skin grafting on limbs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in JPRAS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive perioperative management of a giant neurofibroma complicated by hemorrhagic shock: a case report.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Recurrent giant neurofibroma of the posterior neck and upper back with failed primary grafting and salvage reconstruction: a case report.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numerous studies have demonstrated that negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) can enhance wound healing; however, its use following skin grafting remains a subject of debate. Given the high rate of graft failure in extremities and the critical role these areas play in human mobility, this study aimed to evaluate whether NPWT improves skin grafts take rates after extremity skin grafting. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, and 18 studies involved 1098 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The effectiveness of NPWT versus conventional therapy after extremity skin grafting was compared. The primary outcome was the graft take rate, while secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. Additionally, we evaluated the influence of graft position, graft thickness, and negative pressure on graft take rates. Compared to conventional therapy, NPWT significantly improved the graft take rates (MD = 11.04, 95 % CI [5.57, 16.51],
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.