Exploring the potential of stem cell therapy in the regeneration of damaged skin tissues in severe burns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Severe burn injuries present reconstructive challenges that conventional treatments address incompletely, often resulting in debilitating scarring and functional impairment. This research investigated autologous adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell therapy for deep partial-thickness and full-thickness burns at a Portuguese academic burn center between January 2021 and December 2023. Twenty-four patients with total body surface area involvement of 15-40% received stem cell therapy in addition to standard burn care, with outcomes compared to matched historical controls receiving standard treatment alone. Wound healing assessments demonstrated accelerated closure in stem cell-treated patients, reaching 72% wound closure at day 14 compared to 48% with standard care. By day 28, stem cell recipients achieved 95% closure versus 78% in controls. Molecular analysis revealed upregulation of angiogenic markers including VEGF and CD31 along with enhanced collagen deposition patterns favoring organized matrix formation over disordered scar tissue. Long-term scar quality evaluation using the Vancouver Scar Scale demonstrated sustained benefits at 12-month follow-up. Stem cell-treated patients achieved mean scores of 2.0 compared to 4.0 in the standard care group, reflecting improvements in vascularity, pliability, height, and pigmentation. No serious adverse events attributable to stem cell therapy were observed. These findings support the therapeutic potential of autologous mesenchymal stem cells as an adjunct to conventional burn management, warranting larger controlled trials to establish optimal protocols and identify patients most likely to benefit.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".