Literature DB >> 30005989

Microbial cellulose dressing compared with silver sulphadiazine for the treatment of partial thickness burns: A prospective, randomised, clinical trial.

Ahmed Aboelnaga1, Moustafa Elmasry2, Osama A Adly1, Mohamed A Elbadawy1, Ashraf H Abbas1, Islam Abdelrahman2, Omar Salah1, Ingrid Steinvall3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The current treatment for partial thickness burns at the trial site is silver sulphadiazine, as it minimises bacterial colonisation of wounds. Its deleterious effect on wound healing, together with the need for repeated, often painful, procedures, has brought about the search for a better treatment. Microbial cellulose has shown promising results that avoid these disadvantages. The aim of this study was therefore to compare microbial cellulose with silver sulphadiazine as a dressing for partial thickness burns.
METHOD: All patients who presented with partial thickness (superficial and deep dermal) burns from October 2014 to October 2016 were screened for this randomised clinical trial. Twenty patients were included in each group: the cellulose group was treated with microbial cellulose sheets and the control group with silver sulphadiazine cream 10mg/g. The wound was evaluated every third day. Pain was assessed using the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) scale during and after each procedure. Other variables recorded were age, sex, percentage total body surface area burned (TBSA%), clinical signs of infection, time for epithelialisation and hospital stay. Linear multivariable regression was used to analyse the significance of differences between the treatment groups by adjusting for the size and depth of the burn, and the patient's age.
RESULTS: Median TBSA% was 9% (IQR 5.5-12.5). The median number of dressing changes was 1 (IQR 1-2) in the cellulose group, which was lower than that in the control group (median 9.5, IQR 6-16) (p<0.001). Multivariable regression analysis showed that the group treated with microbial cellulose spent 6.3 (95% CI 0.2-12.5) fewer days in hospital (p=0.04), had a mean score that was 3.4 (95% CI 2.5-4.3) points lower during wound care (p<0.001), and 2.2 (95% CI 1.6-2.7) afterwards (p<0.001). Epithelialisation was quicker, but not significantly so.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the microbial cellulose dressing is a better first choice for treatment of partial thickness burns than silver sulphadiazine cream. Fewer dressings of the wound were done and, combined with the low pain scores, this is good for both the patients and the health care system. The differences in randomisation of the area of burns is, however, a concern that needs to be included in the interpretation of the results.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Burn; Cellulose; Pain; Time for epithelialisation; Wound dressing

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30005989     DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2018.06.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Burns        ISSN: 0305-4179            Impact factor:   2.744


  9 in total

1.  Bacterial Cellulose-Adaptation of a Nature-Identical Material to the Needs of Advanced Chronic Wound Care.

Authors:  Paul Zahel; Uwe Beekmann; Thomas Eberlein; Michael Schmitz; Oliver Werz; Dana Kralisch
Journal:  Pharmaceuticals (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-30

2.  Evaluation of EpiProtect® microbial cellulose burns dressings in young children.

Authors:  Lindsay A Shanks; Andrea Cronshaw; K Skaria Alexander; Jonathan A Davies; Ciaran P O'Boyle
Journal:  Scars Burn Heal       Date:  2020-08-11

3.  Bacterial Cellulose: Functional Modification and Wound Healing Applications.

Authors:  Wei He; Jian Wu; Jin Xu; Dina A Mosselhy; Yudong Zheng; Siming Yang
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 4.730

4.  Topical treatment for facial burns.

Authors:  Cornelis J Hoogewerf; M Jenda Hop; Marianne K Nieuwenhuis; Irma Mmh Oen; Esther Middelkoop; Margriet E Van Baar
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-07-29

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.  Recent Advances and Applications of Bacterial Cellulose in Biomedicine.

Authors:  Sam Swingler; Abhishek Gupta; Hazel Gibson; Marek Kowalczuk; Wayne Heaselgrave; Iza Radecka
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 4.329

7.  Development of Bacterial Cellulose Biocomposites Combined with Starch and Collagen and Evaluation of Their Properties.

Authors:  Silmar Baptista Nunes; Katharine Valéria Saraiva Hodel; Giulia da Costa Sacramento; Pollyana da Silva Melo; Fernando Luiz Pellegrini Pessoa; Josiane Dantas Viana Barbosa; Roberto Badaró; Bruna Aparecida Souza Machado
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-19       Impact factor: 3.623

Review 8.  From Residues to Added-Value Bacterial Biopolymers as Nanomaterials for Biomedical Applications.

Authors:  Francisco G Blanco; Natalia Hernández; Virginia Rivero-Buceta; Beatriz Maestro; Jesús M Sanz; Aránzazu Mato; Ana M Hernández-Arriaga; M Auxiliadora Prieto
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 5.076

9.  Antibacterial Activity of Bacterial Cellulose Loaded with Bacitracin and Amoxicillin: In Vitro Studies.

Authors:  Georgiana-Mădălina Lemnaru Popa; Roxana Doina Truşcă; Cornelia-Ioana Ilie; Roxana Elena Țiplea; Denisa Ficai; Ovidiu Oprea; Anicuța Stoica-Guzun; Anton Ficai; Lia-Mara Dițu
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2020-09-06       Impact factor: 4.411

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.