[Clinical observation of basic fibroblast growth factor combined with topical oxygen therapy in enhancing burn wound healing].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) combined with topical oxygen therapy for deep II degree burn wounds, by comparing the effects of bFGF combined with topical oxygen therapy and bFGF with routine therapy. METHODS: From February 2004 to July 2009, 85 patients with deep II degree burn wounds (117 wounds) were enrolled and divided into 4 groups randomly according to different treatments. There was no significant difference in sex, age, disease course, wound size, and wound treatment size among 4 groups (P > 0.05). In group A, 18 patients (28 wounds) were treated routinely; in group B, 23 patients (30 wounds) were treated with routine methods and topical oxygen therapy; in group C, 19 patients (25 wounds) were treated with routine methods and bFGF therapy; and in group D, 25 patients (34 wounds) were treated with routine methods and bFGF/topical oxygen therapy. Topical oxygen therapy was administered to the wound for 90 minutes per day for 3 weeks. The bFGF therapy was applied everyday (150 U/cm2) for 3 weeks. RESULTS: All cases were followed up 6-12 months (9 months on average). The wound healing times in groups A, B, C, and D were (27.3 +/- 6.6), (24.2 +/- 5.8), (22.2 +/- 6.8), and (18.2 +/- 4.8) days, respectively; showing significant difference between group A and group D (P < 0.05). The wound healing rates in groups A, B, C, and D were 67.8% +/- 12.1%, 85.1% +/- 7.5%, 89.2% +/- 8.3%, and 96.1% +/- 5.6%, respectively; showing significant differences between group A and groups B, C, D (P < 0.05). The therapic effective rates in groups A, B, C, and D were 75%, 90%, 92%, and 100%, respectively; showing significant difference between group A and group D (P < 0.05). The Vancouver scar scale scoring of group D 6 months after treatment was better than that of group A (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The bFGF combined with topical oxygen therapy can enhance deep II degree burn wound healing. Furthermore, the therapy method is simple and convenient.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".