Systematic review compares outcomes of autologous skin grafts and bioengineered substitutes in deep burns, suggesting further research is necessary.
Next-generation bioengineered skin substitutes offer donor-sparing alternatives to STSG for deep burns. Review of three studies (N≈297) found STSG had better early graft take, while substitutes reduced autograft need, enabled expansion, and improved scarring. Healing may be slower. Larger multicenter trials with standardized outcomes are needed further research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cendana et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: