Fig 1.
Flow chart of the study selection.
Fig 2.
Results of the risk of bias assessment of 47 included studies in this systematic review.
The first two items assess study quality by scoring reporting, a “yes” score indicates reported and a “no” score indicates unreported. The other items assessed risk of bias, with “yes” indicating low risk of bias, “no” high risk of bias, and “?” unclear risk of bias.
Fig 3.
Results of the risk of bias assessment of the 3 included studies in this systematic review where animals were their own control group.
The first two items assess study quality by scoring reporting, a “yes” score indicates reported and a “no” score indicates unreported. The other items assessed risk of bias, with “yes” indicating low risk of bias, “no” high risk of bias, and “?” unclear risk of bias.
Table 1.
The characteristics of all 50 included references.
Table 2.
Summary of the overall analyses.
Table 3.
Subgroup analysis for graft length.
Fig 4.
Muscle weight publication bias.
Fig 5.
Axon count publication bias.
Fig 6.
Nerve conduction velocity publication bias.
Fig 7.
Global overview decellularization methods.