| Literature DB >> 29171152 |
Romana Klasinc1,2, Lee Ann Augustin3,4, Harald Below4, Romy Baguhl4, Ojan Assadian1, Elisabeth Presterl1, Axel Kramer4.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare different wound-rinsing solutions to determine differences in the efficiency and to evaluate three different in vitro models for wound cleansing. Different wound-rinsing solutions (physiological saline solution, ringer lactate solution for wound irrigation, water and a solution containing polihexanide and the surfactant undecylenamidopropyl-betain) were applied on standardised test models (one- and three-chamber model, flow-cell method and a biofilm model), each challenged with three different standardised wound test soils. In the one-chamber model saline showed a better effect on decontaminating proteins than the ringer lactate solution. In the flow-cell method, water performed better than physiological saline solution, whereas ringer lactate solution demonstrated the lowest cleansing effect. No obvious superiority between the two electrolyte-containing solutions was detectable in the biofilm model. Unfortunately, it was not possible to assess the protein decontamination qualities of the surfactant-containing solution because of the interference with the protein measurement. The flow-cell method was able to detect differences between different rinse solutions because it works at constant flow mechanics, imitating a wound-rinsing procedure. The three-chamber and the less-pronounced modified one-chamber method as well as the biofilm model had generated inhomogeneous results.Entities:
Keywords: Biofilm; Test models; Wound cleansing; Wound-rinsing solutions
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29171152 PMCID: PMC7949879 DOI: 10.1111/iwj.12850
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Wound J ISSN: 1742-4801 Impact factor: 3.315