Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2024
Comparative study on the efficacy of PRP gel and UC-MSCs gel as adjuvant therapies in the treatment of DFU wounds.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jin Yan, Meng MingYao, Zhang YaFang, Mo Lin, Gao Hui, Liu YuHong, Wu Jun, Yang PingFen, Zhang ZhongZi, Jia Fu, Zhao YiYi, Huang Ying
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a common and serious complication of diabetes, and its treatment is challenging. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) gel and umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (UC-MSCs) gel have been concerned as new therapies for DFU in recent years, and comparative studies on the efficacy and mechanisms of these methods, however, are rarely reported.
METHODS: Thirty patients with DFU were selected and divided into the PRP group and the UC-MSCs group, and wound healing, foot blood vessels (ABI index), infection index (CRP), neuropathy symptoms (TCSS score), and foot skin temperature before and after treatment were compared between the two groups. SPSS 21.0 was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The results showed that the efficacy of the UC-MSCs gel group was significantly better than that of the PRP group in terms of wound healing rate, time to complete wound closure, ABI index, CRP level and TCSS score. No statistically significant difference in foot skin temperature was observed between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: The efficacy of UC-MSCs gel is significantly superior to that of PRP gel in the treatment of DFU, with shortened time to complete wound closure, increased wound healing rate, better pain and infection control, and improved vascular and neurological symptoms.
METHODS: Thirty patients with DFU were selected and divided into the PRP group and the UC-MSCs group, and wound healing, foot blood vessels (ABI index), infection index (CRP), neuropathy symptoms (TCSS score), and foot skin temperature before and after treatment were compared between the two groups. SPSS 21.0 was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The results showed that the efficacy of the UC-MSCs gel group was significantly better than that of the PRP group in terms of wound healing rate, time to complete wound closure, ABI index, CRP level and TCSS score. No statistically significant difference in foot skin temperature was observed between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: The efficacy of UC-MSCs gel is significantly superior to that of PRP gel in the treatment of DFU, with shortened time to complete wound closure, increased wound healing rate, better pain and infection control, and improved vascular and neurological symptoms.