בשל "הגנת זכויות יוצרים", מובא להלן קישור למאמר בלבד. לקריאתו בטקסט מלא, אנא פנה לספרייה הרפואית הזמינה לך.

Allograft skin (AS) transplantation has been considered to be the gold standard for replacing tissue damage, following burns.

However, increasingly new biosynthetic skin substitutes are being developed as alternatives.

The objective of this systematic review is to compare AS with other skin substitutes, which have been used in the treatment of burns.

Randomized clinical trial (RCT) and nonrandomized clinical trial (NRCT) studies comparing AS to any other skin substitute in the treatment of burns were extracted from PubMed/Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, and Web of Science.

For the risk of bias analysis, the Cochrane bias risk handbook was used for RCT studies and ROBINS-1 was used for NRCT studies. Outcomes such as healing, self-grafting, scar appearance, and mortality were evaluated.