[Effectiveness of scar split thickness skin graft combined with acellular allogeneic dermis in treatment of large deep II degree burn scar].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of using scar split thickness skin grafts combined with acellular allogeneic dermis in the treatment of large deep II degree burn scar. METHODS: Between January 2013 and December 2013, 20 cases of large deep II degree burn scar undergoing plastic operation were enrolled. There were 14 males and 6 females, aged 4 to 60 years (mean, 40 years). Burn reasons included hydrothermal burns in 10 cases, flame burns in 9 cases, and lime burns in 1 case. The burn area accounted for 70% to 96% total body surface area (TBSA) with an average of 79% TBSA. The time from wound healing to scar repair was 3 months to 2 years (mean, 7 months). Based on self-control, 0.7 mm scar split thickness skin graft was used to repair the wound at the right side of joints after scar resection (control group, n=35), 0.5 mm scar split thickness skin graft combined with acellular allogeneic dermis at the left side of joints (trial group, n=30). Difference was not statistically significant in the scar sites between 2 groups (Z=-1.152, P=0.249). After grafting, negative pressure drainage was given for 10 days; plaster was used for immobilization till wound healing; and all patients underwent regular rehabilitation exercises. RESULTS: No significant difference was found in wound healing, infection, and healing time between 2 groups (P > 0.05). All patients were followed up for 6 months. According to the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), the score was 5.23 ± 1.41 in trial group and was 10.17 ± 2.26 in control group, showing significant difference (t=8.925, P=0.000). Referring to Activities of Daily Living (ADL) grading standards to assess joint function, the results were excellent in 8 cases, good in 20 cases, fair in 1 case, and poor in 1 case in trial group; the results were excellent in 3 cases, good in 5 cases, fair in 22 cases, and poor in 5 cases in control group; and difference was statistically significant (Z=-4.894, P=0.000). CONCLUSION: A combination of scar split thickness skin graft and acellular allogeneic dermis in the treatment of large deep II degree burn scar is feasible and can become one of solution to the problem of skin source tension.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".