MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W90023181

A comparative study of spray keratinocytes and autologous meshed split-thickness skin graft in the treatment of acute burn injuries.

2015· article· en· W90023181 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rajiv Sood, David Roggy, Madeline Zieger, Muhammad Nazim, Brett Hartman, Jeff T. Gibbs

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePopulationSurgeryBiopsySkin biopsyDermatologyBurn injuryPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: ReCell (Avita Medical, Northridge, CA) is an autologous cell harvesting (ACH) device that enables a thin split-thickness skin biopsy to be processed to produce a cell population that includes a mixed population of keratinocytes, melanocytes, Langerhans cells, and papillary dermal fibroblasts for immediate delivery via a spray applicator onto a prepared skin surface. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this Institutional Review Board-approved US Food and Drug Administration phase 2 study, the authors prospectively evaluated the treatment of partial-thickness burns in patients with two 320 cm2 areas, 1 area treated with the ACH device and the other with a meshed split-thickness skin graft (MSTSG) as a control. The authors compared the treatment areas for graft take, pigmentation, and color match to surrounding healthy tissue, scarring, and pain. RESULTS: In this preliminary study, 10 patients were treated with this protocol. Eight patients had 100% take to both treatment areas and 2 patients had significant non-take and graft loss attributable to underexcised wound beds and difficulty with the spray applicator. Pigmentation and color match ratings were identical at week 52 and the Modified Vancouver Scar Scale scores were comparable. One subject rated the autologous cell harvesting site as having a better appearance, while the remaining subjects rated their ACH and MSTSG sites' appearances as being comparable. In early follow-up visits, pain ratings were slightly elevated in the ACH group due to graft healing; however, in visits following week 2, pain ratings at the ACH and MSTSG sites were rated similarly by all patients. CONCLUSION: This preliminary report describes an early experience with the ACH device and the treatment of partial-thickness burn injuries. In this 10-patient series, patients benefitted from having a decreased donor site size and comparable outcomes with MSTSG treatment. While this preliminary underpowered study has provided positive results, there is a learning curve with choosing the proper wound for treatment with the ACH device, as well as with using the device.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations64
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207