| Literature DB >> 21747844 |
Patrizia Martini1, Carlo Mazzatenta, Giorgio Saponati.
Abstract
A total of 227 patients (mean age 41.3 years, 52% females) with at least one second-degree superficial cutaneous burn of thermal origin of a smallest transverse diameter ≥20 mm and a largest transverse diameter ≤90 mm were randomised to receive the topical application of aqueous extract of Triticum vulgare (Fitostimoline) in two different forms (soaked gauzes and cream) or catalase of horse origin in form of gel (Citrizan Gel), given up to healing or to a maximum of 20 days. The rate of lesion healing at end of study was significantly higher in patients treated with Fitostimoline (gauzes 97.3%, cream 91.5%) than in those receiving catalase (84.5%). The pooled Fitostimoline groups were also significantly more effective than catalase gel in reducing total symptoms score, pain at medication, pain at rest, and burning at end of study. Both formulations of Fitostimoline and catalase gel were well tolerated in terms of adverse effects in the site of application.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21747844 PMCID: PMC3131001 DOI: 10.1155/2011/978291
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Dermatol Res Pract ISSN: 1687-6113
Demographic and lesion baseline characteristics in the three groups (all patients enrolled). Entries are mean ± standard deviation, unless otherwise stated.
| Fitostimoline soaked gauzes | Fitostimoline cream | Catalase gel | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex, | 41 (53.2) | 35 (47.9) | 42 (54.5) |
| Age (years) | 40.5 ± 15.0 | 42.8 ± 14.0 | 40.8 ± 15.3 |
| Weight (Kg) | 69.7 ± 13.2 | 73.0 ± 14.1 | 70.1 ± 13.5 |
| Height (cm) | 169 ± 9 | 170 ± 9 | 169 ± 9 |
| Body mass index (Kg/cm2) | 24.3 ± 4.0 | 25.2 ± 4.2 | 24.4 ± 3.9 |
| Largest diameter (cm) | 65.9 ± 20.8 | 66.4 ± 23.8 | 62.8 ± 20.0 |
| Lesion surface area (cm2) | 25.8 ± 16.2 | 28.9 ± 20.3 | 23.1 ± 15.0 |
| Total symptoms score | 8.6 ± 3.7 | 8.2 ± 3.5 | 9.1 ± 4.2 |
Figure 1Mean values of largest burn diameter (mm) during the study and results of comparisons between groups at Day 10 (efficacy population).
Figure 2Mean values of lesion surface area (cm2) during the study and results of comparisons between groups at Day 10 (efficacy population).
Lesion size and lesion disappearance (healing) at end of study in the efficacy population.
| Fitostimoline soaked gauzes | Fitostimoline cream | Catalase gel | Fitostimoline pooled | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Largest cross-diameter# | ||||
| mean (95% CI)a | 0.1 (0.0–0.5) | 0.4 (0.0–1.5) | 2.3 (0.3–5.9) | 0.2 (0.0–0.7) |
|
| ||||
| Surface area# | ||||
| mean (95% CI)a | 0.1 (0.0–0.3) | 0.2 (0.0–0.7) | 1.6 (0.1–4.5) | 0.1 (0.1–0.3) |
|
| ||||
|
| 71 (97.3) | 65 (91.5) | 60 (84.5) | 136 (94.5) |
|
| 2 (2.7) | 6 (8.5) | 11 (15.5) | 8 (5.5) |
|
| ||||
| Overall comparison among groups |
| |||
| Fitostimoline gauzes/cream | RR (95% CI)b 0.32 (0.066–1.51) |
| ||
| Fitostimoline pooled/Catalase gel | RR (95% CI)b 0.35 (0.15–0.84) |
| ||
#As percent ratio of baseline value.
aBack transformation of values calculated on angular-transformed data.
bRelative risk of not achieving lesion disappearance (size 0).
*Fisher's exact test.
Reepithelialisation at Day 10 (efficacy population).
| Fitostimoline soaked gauzes | Fitostimoline cream | Catalase gel | Fitostimoline pooled | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| >0% to 25% | 3 (4.0) | 4 (5.6) | 5 (7.0) | 7 (4.8) |
| >25% to 50% | 11 (14.7) | 6 (8.5) | 13 (18.3) | 17 (11.6) |
| >50% to 75% | 10 (13.3) | 15 (21.1) | 6 (8.5) | 25 (17.1) |
| >75% to 95% | 9 (12.0) | 11 (15.5) | 13 (18.3) | 20 (13.7) |
| >95% | 42 (56.0) | 35 (49.3) | 34 (47.9) | 77 (52.7) |
|
| ||||
| Overall comparison among groups |
| |||
| Fitostimoline gauzes versus cream |
| |||
| Fitostimoline pooled versus catalase gel |
| |||
‡Kruskal-Wallis test.
†Mann-Whitney test.
Figure 3Mean values of total symptoms score during the study and results of comparisons between groups at end of study (efficacy population).