Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 256

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The efficacy and safety of Grafix® for the treatment of chronic diabetic foot ulcers: results of a multi‐centre, controlled, randomised, blinded, clinical trial

Lavery, Lawrence A, Fulmer, James, Shebetka, Karry Ann, Regulski, Matthew, Vayser, Dean, Fried, David, Kashefsky, Howard, Owings, Tammy M, Nadarajah, Janaki, The Grafix Diabetic Foot Ulcer Study Group·2014·International Wound Journal

Abstract

In a randomised, controlled study, we compared the efficacy of Grafix®, a human viable wound matrix (hVWM) (N = 50), to standard wound care (n = 47) to heal diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with complete wound closure by 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints included the time to wound closure, adverse events and wound closure in the crossover phase. The proportion of patients who achieved complete wound closure was significantly higher in patients who received Grafix (62%) compared with controls (21%, P = 0·0001). The median time to healing was 42 days in Grafix patients compared with 69·5 days in controls (P = 0·019). There were fewer Grafix patients with adverse events (44% versus 66%, P = 0·031) and fewer Grafix patients with wound‐related infections (18% versus 36·2%, P = 0·044). Among the study subjects that healed, ulcers remained closed in 82·1% of patients (23 of 28 patients) in the Grafix group versus 70% (7 of 10 patients) in the control group (P = 0·419). Treatment with Grafix significantly improved DFU healing compared with standard wound therapy. Importantly, Grafix also reduced DFU‐related complications. The results of this well‐controlled study showed that Grafix is a safe and more effective therapy for treating DFUs than standard wound therapy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/iwj.12329

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. 10.1016/j.diabres.2011.10.040 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2008, 2007 National Diabetes Fact Sheet
  3. 10.2337/dc12-2625 · DOI
  4. 10.1001/jama.293.2.217 · DOI
  5. 10.1046/j.1524-4725.2001.00280.x · DOI
  6. 10.2337/dc12-0200 · DOI
  7. 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2005.00083.x · DOI
  8. 10.2337/diacare.22.5.692 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.2337/diacare.26.6.1701 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.2337/diacare.24.2.290 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181c722bb · DOI
  12. 10.5966/sctm.2011-0018 · DOI
  13. 10.2307/2531692 · DOI
  14. 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2009.00585.x · DOI · Paper page
  15. Regulski M, 2013, A retrospective analysis of a human cellular repair matrix for the treatment of chronic wounds, Ostomy Wound Manage, 59, 38
  16. Armstrong DG, 1998, Peak foot pressures influence the healing time of diabetic foot ulcers treated with total contact casts, J Rehabil Res Dev, 35, 1
  17. 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182024864 · DOI
  18. 10.2337/diacare.19.8.818 · DOI
  19. 10.2337/diacare.28.3.551 · DOI
  20. 10.2337/diacare.28.3.555 · DOI
  21. 10.2337/diacare.24.6.1019 · DOI
  22. 10.2337/dc08-0771 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1002/dmrr.2386 · DOI
  24. 10.2337/diacare.12.6.384 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Steed DL, 1996, Effect of extensive debridement and treatment on the healing of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetic Ulcer Study Group, J Am Coll Surg, 183, 61
  26. 10.1046/j.1524-475X.2002.10603.x · DOI
  27. 10.1016/j.diabres.2008.11.030 · DOI
  28. 10.2337/dc05-2425 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.2337/dc07-1302 · DOI
  30. Davis J, 1910, Skin transplantation with a review of 550 cases at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, John Hopkins Med J, 15, 307
  31. Sabella N, 1913, Use of fetal membranes in skin grafting, Med Records NY, 83, 478
  32. 10.1001/jama.1913.04340130021008 · DOI
  33. ArnoldY LerouxJD WilliamsM DanilkovitchA. A comparison study of the anti‐oxidant effects of cellular versus acellular human repair matrices. In:Symposium on Advanced Wound Care; 2013 May 2–5; Las Vegas (NV).
  34. ArnoldY LerouxJD WilliamsM DanilkovitchA. A comparison study of the angiogenic effect of cellular versus acellular human repair matrices. In:Symposium on Advanced Wound Care; 2013 May 2–5; Las Vegas (NV).
  35. ArnoldY LerouxJD WilliamsM DanilkovitchA. A comparison study of the anti‐inflammatory effects of cellular versus acellular human repair matrices. In:Symposium on Advanced Wound Care; 2013 May 2–5; Las Vegas (NV).

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Lavery, L. A., Fulmer, J., Shebetka, K. A., Regulski, M., Vayser, D., Fried, D., Kashefsky, H., Owings, T. M., Nadarajah, J., & The Grafix Diabetic Foot Ulcer Study Group
Affiliations
  • Department of Plastic Surgery University of Texas Southwestern Dallas TX USA
  • River City Clinical Research Jacksonville FL USA
  • Clinical Trials of Texas San Antonio TX USA
  • Ocean County Foot and Ankle Toms River NJ USA
  • ILD Research Center Carlsbad CA USA
  • Omega Medical Research Warwick RI USA
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill NC USA
  • Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USA
  • Aiyan Diabetes Center Evans GA USA
Venue
International Wound Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-07-21
Volume
11
Issue
5
Pages
554-560
ISSN
  • 1742-4801
  • 1742-481X
Cited by
256
References
0
Language
en
Funders
Osiris Therapeutics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.