Conectar
Chronic wounds, characterized by prolonged healing processes, pose a significant medical challenge with multifaceted aetiologies, including local and systemic factors. Here, it explores the complex pathogenesis of chronic wounds, emphasizing the disruption in the normal phases of wound healing, particularly the inflammatory phase, leading to an imbalance in extracellular matrix (ECM) dynamics and persistent inflammation. Senescent cell populations further contribute to impaired wound healing in chronic lesions. Traditional medical management focuses on addressing underlying causes, but many chronic wounds resist to conventional treatments, necessitating innovative approaches. Recent attention has turned to autologous orthobiologics, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), as potential regenerative interventions. These biologically derived materials, including bone marrow aspirate/concentrate (BMA/BMAC) and adipose tissue-derived stem cells (ADSCs), exhibit promising cytokine content and regenerative potential. MSCs, in particular, have emerged as key players in wound healing, influencing inflammation and promoting tissue regeneration. This paper reviews relevant scientific literature regarding basic science and brings real-world evidence regarding the use of orthobiologics in the treatment of chronic wounds, irrespective of aetiology. The discussion highlights the regenerative properties of PRP, PRF, BMA, BMAC and SVF, showcasing their potential to enhance wound healing. Despite advancements, further research is essential to elucidate the specific roles of each orthobiologic and determine optimal applications for different wound types. The conclusion underscores the evolving landscape in chronic wound management, with a call for more comprehensive studies to refine treatment strategies and maximize the benefits of regenerative medicine.
Systematic review of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies undertaken in the WHO European Region to measure pre-existing and cumulative seropositivity prior to the roll out of vaccination programmes.
A systematic review of the literature.
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the preprint servers MedRxiv and BioRxiv in the WHO ‘COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease’ database using a predefined search strategy. Articles were supplemented with unpublished WHO-supported Unity-aligned seroprevalence studies and other studies reported directly to WHO Regional Office for Europe and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.
Studies published before the widespread implementation of COVID-19 vaccination programmes in January 2021 among the general population and blood donors, at national and regional levels.
At least two independent researchers extracted the eligible studies; a third researcher resolved any disagreements. Study risk of bias was assessed using a quality scoring system based on sample size, sampling and testing methodologies.
In total, 111 studies from 26 countries published or conducted between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2020 across the WHO European Region were included. A significant heterogeneity in implementation was noted across the studies, with a paucity of studies from the east of the Region. Sixty-four (58%) studies were assessed to be of medium to high risk of bias. Overall, SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity prior to widespread community circulation was very low. National seroprevalence estimates after circulation started ranged from 0% to 51.3% (median 2.2% (IQR 0.7–5.2%); n=124), while subnational estimates ranged from 0% to 52% (median 5.8% (IQR 2.3%–12%); n=101), with the highest estimates in areas following widespread local transmission.
The low levels of SARS-CoV-2 antibody in most populations prior to the start of vaccine programmes underlines the critical importance of targeted vaccination of priority groups at risk of severe disease, while maintaining reduced levels of transmission to minimise population morbidity and mortality.
FreshRSS 