ArticleAnimal models and experimental medicine2026
Comparison of rat hypertrophic scar models: Caudal tension model with superior pathological consistency.
Article in Animal models and experimental medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundHypertrophic scars (HS) are a common fibrotic disorder in skin wound healing, characterized by excessive fibroblast proliferation and abnormal collagen deposition, with an incidence reaching 40%-70% in burn patients. Current treatments (e.g., corticosteroid injections) face challenges such as high recurrence rates and significant adverse effects, highlighting the urgent need for reliable animal models to investigate pathogenesis and develop novel therapies.
methodsForty-eight male Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were used to systematically compare modeling efficacy across auricular (3.5 mm corneal trephine), dorsal (linear incision/tension/full-thickness excision), and caudal (linear incision/tension) sites. Each subgroup contained 12 rats (n = 12/group). Scar formation was evaluated over 60 days via macroscopic observation, Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scoring, H&E/Masson staining (fibroblast density/collagen deposition), and immunofluorescence α-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA), transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β), type I collagen/type III collagen (COL I/III).
resultsThe caudal tension group demonstrated optimal outcomes, with scar thickness (0.394 ± 0.006 mm), fibroblast density (1079 ± 118 cells/mm
conclusionThe tension method on the tail is a simple, stable, and clinically relevant HS model, effectively replicating human pathological features and providing an ideal platform for disease mechanism research and drug screening.
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.