The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Histologic characterization of vaginal vs. abdominal surgical wound healing in a rabbit model
Abstract
We aimed to compare the histologic characteristics of vaginal vs. abdominal surgical wound healing in the rabbit. Bilateral 6 mm full‐thickness circular segments were excised from the vagina and abdominal skin in 34 New Zealand white female rabbits. Animals were euthanized on the day of and 4, 7, 10, 14, 21, 28, and 35 days after wounding, and their wounds were evaluated using a modified scoring system. The inter‐ and intraobserver agreements of the scoring system were good (weighted κ 0.63 and 0.71, respectively). A transient fibrinous crust was evident in 75% of the abdominal and in none of the vaginal wound specimens on days 4–7 after wounding (p=0.01). Acute inflammation peaked at day 4 in both the vaginal and abdominal wounds, while chronic inflammation peaked at days 4–7 and 14–21 in the abdomen and vagina, respectively. Both neovascularization and the amount of granulation tissue peaked at days 4 and 7 in the vagina and abdomen, respectively. Maturation of granulation tissue and collagen deposition increased persistently in both tissues until postwounding day 35. Reepithelialization increased after wounding, and was completed by day 14 in both tissues. The surgical wound‐healing process in both the vagina and abdomen includes transient acute and chronic inflammation, fibroblast proliferation, and neovascularization, as well as progressive maturation of granulation tissue, reepithelialization, and collagen deposition. A transient fibrinous crust forms in the abdomen but not in the vagina 4–7 days after wounding. The modified histologic scoring system described here was found to be reliable and reproducible.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Angiogenesis in health and disease
Carmeliet, P. (2003) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm0603-653 · Cited by 4,276
Regulation of Wound Healing by Growth Factors and Cytokines
WERNER, S., & GROSE, R. (2003) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.2003.83.3.835 · Cited by 3,629
Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence
OLSEN, A., SMITH, V, BERGSTROM, J., COLLING, J., & CLARK, A. (1997) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00058-6 · Cited by 3,335
PDGF and FGF stimulate wound healing in the genetically diabetic mouse.
Greenhalgh, D. G., Sprugel, K. H., Murray, M. J., & Ross, R. (1990) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 681
Wound Healing: Biochemical and Clinical Aspects
Clay, R. P. (1993) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings · doi:10.1016/s0025-6196(12)60711-3 · Cited by 534
A New Quantitative Scale for Clinical Scar Assessment
Beausang, E., Floyd, H., Dunn, K. W., Orton, C. I., & Ferguson, M. W. J. (1998) · Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/00006534-199811000-00022 · Cited by 429
Mustoe, T. A., Pierce, G. F., Morishima, C., & Deuel, T. F. (1991) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci115048 · Cited by 266
Possible positive autocrine feedback in the prereplicative phase of human fibroblasts
Paulsson, Y., Hammacher, A., Heldin, C.-H., & Westermark, B. (1987) · Nature · doi:10.1038/328715a0 · Cited by 224
Basics of Cutaneous Wound Repair
CLARK, R. A. F. (1993) · The Journal of Dermatologic Surgery and Oncology · doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.1993.tb00413.x · Cited by 210
Inflammatory mediators in wound healing
Henry, G., & Garner, W. L. (2003) · Surgical Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/s0039-6109(02)00200-1 · Cited by 175
Cited by
Wound Healing Effect of Kaempferol in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Rats
Özay, Y., Güzel, S., Yumrutaş, Ö., Pehlivanoğlu, B., Erdoğdu, İ. H., Yildirim, Z., Türk, B. A., & Darcan, S. (2019) · Journal of Surgical Research · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2018.08.009 · Cited by 158
Healing effect of sea buckthorn, olive oil, and their mixture on full-thickness burn wounds
Edraki, M., Akbarzadeh, A., Hosseinzadeh, M., Tanideh, N., Salehi, A., & Koohi-Hosseinabadi, O. (2014) · Advances in Skin & Wound Care · doi:10.1097/01.asw.0000451061.85540.f9 · Cited by 62
Metadata
- Authors
- Abramov, Y., Golden, B., Sullivan, M., Botros, S. M., Miller, J. R., Alshahrour, A., Goldberg, R. P., & Sand, P. K.
- Venue
- Wound Repair and Regeneration
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-01
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 80-86
- ISSN
- 1067-1927 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-475X
- OpenAlex
- W2040612059
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 15
- FWCI
- 2.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Histologic characterization of vaginal vs. abdominal surgical wound healing in a rabbit model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1524-475x.2006.00188.x
- The paper
- Abramov, Y., Golden, B., Sullivan, M., Botros, S. M., Miller, J. R., Alshahrour, A., Goldberg, R. P., & Sand, P. K. (2007). Histologic characterization of vaginal vs. abdominal surgical wound healing in a rabbit model. Wound Repair and Regeneration. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475x.2006.00188.x
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.