Literature DB >> 22218066

Eradication of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pressure ulcers comparing a polyhexanide-containing cellulose dressing with polyhexanide swabs in a prospective randomized study.

Thomas Wild1, Maria Bruckner, Martina Payrich, Christoph Schwarz, Thomas Eberlein, Anneke Andriessen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The study evaluated eradication of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) from pressure ulcers comparing swabs containing polyhexanide with a cellulose dressing + polyhexanide. After receiving approval from the ethics committee and informed consent, patients from the centers were recruited.
DESIGN: Prospective randomized study. Thirty patients (n = 15/n = 15), not responding to wound disinfection after a washout period of 2 weeks, were included in the intention-to-treat analysis.
SETTING: This study was performed on hospital patients. PATIENTS: Patients had pressure ulcers containing MRSA.
INTERVENTIONS: For the control group, cleansing was performed with polyhexanide swabs (20 minutes), after which a foam dressing was applied. The study group received a polyhexanide-containing cellulose dressing. For bacterial analysis, semiquantitative swab cultures (Robert Koch Institute recommendations) were taken on days 0, 7, and 14 and during 3 consecutive days.
RESULTS: The groups were comparable at baseline. At day 7, in the control group, 6 of 15 (40%) MRSA eradication. For the study group, there were 13 of 15 (86.67%) who showed MRSA eradication. At day 14, in the control group, there were 10 of 15 (66.67%) who had MRSA eradication, compared with the study group, where 15 of 15 (100%; P < .05) had the MRSA eradicated.
CONCLUSIONS: Wound disinfection with polyhexanide was shown to be successful in both groups, showing superior results for the study group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22218066     DOI: 10.1097/01.ASW.0000410686.14363.ea

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Skin Wound Care        ISSN: 1527-7941            Impact factor:   2.347


  7 in total

1.  Clinical evaluation of gauze-based negative pressure wound therapy in challenging wounds.

Authors:  Umut Tuncel; Ünal Erkorkmaz; Aydın Turan
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 2.  Dressings and topical agents for treating pressure ulcers.

Authors:  Maggie J Westby; Jo C Dumville; Marta O Soares; Nikki Stubbs; Gill Norman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-06-22

3.  Polyhexanide-containing solution reduces ciliary beat frequency of human nasal epithelial cells in vitro.

Authors:  Richard Birk; C Aderhold; J Stern-Sträter; K Hörmann; B A Stuck; J U Sommer
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Increased peritoneal dialysis exit site infections using topical antiseptic polyhexamethylene biguanide compared to mupirocin: results of a safety interim analysis of an open-label prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Andrew Findlay; Charelle Serrano; Sally Punzalan; Stanley L Fan
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2013-02-12       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 5.  Bacterial cellulose: a versatile biopolymer for wound dressing applications.

Authors:  Raquel Portela; Catarina R Leal; Pedro L Almeida; Rita G Sobral
Journal:  Microb Biotechnol       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 5.813

Review 6.  Chitosan and Cellulose-Based Hydrogels for Wound Management.

Authors:  Sibusiso Alven; Blessing Atim Aderibigbe
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-12-18       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 7.  Antibiotics and antiseptics for pressure ulcers.

Authors:  Gill Norman; Jo C Dumville; Zena E H Moore; Judith Tanner; Janice Christie; Saori Goto
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-04-04
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.