A matched-pair, randomized study evaluating the efficacy and safety of Acticoat silver-coated dressing for the treatment of burn wounds. A prospective randomised clinical and histological study of superficial burn wound healing with honey and silver sulfadiazine. A comparative study to evaluate the effect of honey dressing and silver sulfadiazene dressing on wound healing in burn patients. An open study comparing topical silver sulfadiazine and topical silver sulfadiazine-cerium nitrate in the treatment of moderate and severe burns. Prospective randomized controlled study of Hydrofiber dressing containing ionic silver or calcium alginate dressings in non-ischaemic diabetic foot ulcers. DuoDERM hydroactive dressing versus silver sulphadiazine/Bactigras in the emergency treatment of partial skin thickness burns. Comparison of efficacy of 1% silver sulfadiazine and Acticoat for treatment of partial-thickness burn wounds. Xenoderm versus 1% silver sulfadiazine in partial-thickness burns. A comparison of topical Phenytoin with Silverex in the treatment of superficial dermal burn wounds.
A new silver-coating technology was developed to prevent wound adhesion, limit nosocomial infection, control bacterial growth, and facilitate burn wound care through a silver-coated dressing material. For the purposes of this article, Acticoat (Westaim Biomedical Inc, Fort Saskatchawan, Alberta, Canada) silver-coated dressing was used. After in vitro and in vivo studies, a randomized, prospective clinical study was performed to assess the efficacy and ease of use of Acticoat dressing as compared with the efficacy and ease of our institution's standard burn wound care. Thirty burn patients with symmetric wounds were randomized to be treated with either 0.5% silver nitrate solution or Acticoat silver-coated dressing. The dressing was evaluated on the basis of overall patient comfort, ease of use for the wound care provider, and level of antimicrobial effectiveness. Wound pain was rated by the patient using a visual analog scale during dressing removal, application, and 2 hours after application. Ease of use was rated by the nurse providing wound care. Antimicrobial effectiveness was evaluated by quantitative burn wound biopsies performed before and at the end of treatment. Patients found dressing removal less painful with Acticoat than with silver nitrate, but they found the pain to be comparable during application and 2 hours after application. According to the nurses, there was no statistically significant difference in the ease of use. The frequency of burn wound sepsis (> 10(5) organisms per gram of tissue) was less in Acticoat-treated wounds than in those treated with silver nitrate (5 vs 16). Secondary bacteremias arising from infected burn wounds were also less frequent with Acticoat than with silver nitrate-treated wounds (1 vs 5). Acticoat dressing offers a new form of dressing for the burn wound, but it requires further investigation with greater numbers of patients in a larger number of centers and in different phases of burn wound care. Histological and clinical studies of wound healing have been made on comparable fresh partial thickness burns with honey dressing or silver sulfadiazine (SSD) in two groups of 25 randomly allocated patients. Of the wounds treated with honey 84 per cent showed satisfactory epithelialization by the 7th day, and in 100 per cent of the patients by the 21st day. In wounds treated with silver sulfadiazine, epithelialization occurred by the 7th day in 72 per cent of the patients and in 84 per cent of patients by 21 days. Histological evidence of reparative activity was seen in 80 per cent of wounds treated with the honey dressing by the 7th day with minimal inflammation. Fifty two per cent of the silver sulfadiazine treated wounds showed reparative activity with inflammatory changes by the 7th day. Reparative activity reached 100 per cent by 21 days with the honey dressing and 84 per cent with SSD. Thus in honey dressed wounds, early subsidence of acute inflammatory changes, better control of infection and quicker wound healing was observed while in the SSD treated wounds sustained inflammatory reaction was noted even on epithelialization. To compare the effect of honey dressing and silver-sulfadiazene (SSD) dressing on wound healing in burn patients. Patients (n=78) of both sexes, with age group between 10 and 50 years and with first and second degree of burn of less than 50% of TBSA (Total body surface area) were included in the study, over a period of 2 years (2006-08). After stabilization, patients were randomly attributed into two groups: 'honey group' and 'SSD group'. Time elapsed since burn was recorded. After washing with normal saline, undiluted pure honey was applied over the wounds of patients in the honey group (n=37) and SSD cream over the wounds of patients in SSD group (n=41), everyday. Wound was dressed with sterile gauze, cotton pads and bandaged. Status of the wound was assessed every third and seventh day and on the day of completion of study. Patients were followed up every fortnight till epithelialization. The bacteriological examination of the wound was done every seventh day. The mean age for case (honey group) and control (SSD group) was 34.5 years and 28.5 years, respectively. Wound swab culture was positive in 29 out of 36 patients who came within 8 hours of burn and in all patients who came after 24 hours. The average duration of healing in patients treated with honey and SSD dressing at any time of admission was 18.16 and 32.68 days, respectively. Wound of all those patients (100%) who reported within 1 hour became sterile with honey dressing in less than 7 days while none with SSD. All of the wounds became sterile in less than 21 days with honey, while tthis was so in only 36.5% with SSD treated wounds. The honey group included 33 patients reported within 24 hour of injury, and 26 out of them had complete outcome at 2 months of follow-up, while numbers for the SSD group were 32 and 12. Complete outcome for any admission point of time after 2 months was noted in 81% and 37% of patients in the honey group and the SSD group. Honey dressing improves wound healing, makes the wound sterile in lesser time, has a better outcome in terms of prevention of hypertrophic scarring and post-burn contractures, and decreases the need of debridement irrespective of time of admission, when compared to SSD dressing. Sixty patients with moderate and severe burns were randomly assigned to receive topical silver sulfadiazine (SSD) alone (n=30) or SSD combined with cerium nitrate (SSD-CN) (n=30). There were four deaths in the SSD group and one in the SSD-CN group; more patients with higher risk severity survived in the SSD-CN group. Wound infection did not differ significantly between the groups. The rate of re-epithelialization of partial thickness burns was faster by 8 days in the SSD-CN group. The relatively dry shell-like eschar of the SSD-CN-treated burn allowed planned excisions with immediate autologous grafting and the tissue beneath was ready to accept grafting 11 days earlier than in the SSD group (p=0.03). This resulted in a significantly shorter hospital stay for those in the SSD-CN group than in the SSD group (23.3 vs. 30.7 days; p=0.03) with consequent cost savings. A higher incidence of transient stinging pain was reported with application of SSD-CN, but this was effectively managed with analgesics where necessary. The results of this study confirm the greater efficacy of SSD-CN in the treatment of burns patients. Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are at risk of infection and impaired healing, placing patients at risk of lower extremity amputation. DFU care requires debridement and dressings. A prospective, multicentre study compared clinical efficacy and safety of AQUACEL Hydrofiber dressings containing ionic silver (AQAg) with those of Algosteril calcium alginate (CA) dressings in managing out-patients with Type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus and non-ischaemic Wagner Grade 1 or 2 DFUs.
                Patients stratified by antibiotic use on enrolment were randomly assigned to similar protocols including off-loading, AQAg (n = 67) or CA (n = 67) primary dressings and secondary foam dressings for 8 weeks or until healing. Clinical efficacy measures were healing outcomes and primarily healing speed. Adverse events were recorded.
                AQAg and CA groups were comparable at baseline. All ulcer healing outcomes improved in both groups. The mean time to healing was 53 days for AQAg ulcers and 58 days for CA ulcers (P = 0.34). AQAg-treated ulcers reduced in depth nearly twice as much as CA-treated ulcers (0.25 cm vs. 0.13 cm; P = 0.04). There was more overall ulcer improvement and less deterioration in AQAg subjects (P = 0.058), particularly in the subset initially using antibiotics (P = 0.02). Safety profiles of both groups were similar.
                When added to standard care with appropriate off-loading, AQAg silver dressings were associated with favourable clinical outcomes compared with CA dressings, specifically in ulcer depth reduction and in infected ulcers requiring antibiotic treatment. This study reports the first significant clinical effects of a primary wound dressing containing silver on DFU healing. The study compared DuoDERM Burn Pack Hydroactive Dressings (DHD) with silver sulphadiazine/Bactigras dressings (SSD/Bactigras) in the outpatient management of small partial skin thickness burns. Forty-eight patients were entered into the study, and randomly allocated into either the DHD or SSD/Bactigras group. Burn wounds were followed until complete re-epithelialization occurred. There were no statistical differences between the groups, either with respect to their composition or characteristics of healing in days, and patients' subjective responses to treatment. However, application was easier in the DHD group (93 per cent), compared with 71 per cent in the SSD/Bactigras group (P = 0.0009), and the SSD/Bactigras were easier to remove (96 per cent) versus DHD (66 per cent, P = 0.0004). Furthermore, the DHD group had significantly less dressing changes; a mean of three changes per subject in the DHD group compared with eight in the SSD/Bactigras group (P = 0.117). Two burn wounds became infected in the DHD group, and one in the SSD/Bactigras group. In this study both modalities were found to be equally suitable and effective for small partial skin thickness burns. Acticoat (Smith & Nephew, Hull, UK) is a silver-coated dressing reported to reduce infection and exhibit antimicrobial activity in wounds.
                The purpose of the present study was to compare the efficacy ofacticoat and 1% silver sulfadiazine (1% AgSD) for treatment of partial thickness burn wounds.
                The authors reviewed 50 patients who had partial thickness burn wounds less than 25% admitted to Siriraj Burn Unit from May 2002 to September 2005. All patients were divided into 2 groups: the acticoat treated group (25 patients) and the 1% silver sulfadiazine treated group (25 patients). The 2 groups were compared for the etiology of burn wound, demographic data including age, sex, % Total Body Surface Area burn (TBSA%), cultured organisms, wound infection and outcome of Length Of hospital Stay (LOS) and level of pain.
                The authors found no significant differences in age, TBSA (%) between both groups. 7 patients (28%) developed wound infection. There were no differences in wound infection and LOS between both groups (p > 0.05). All of the patients who developed wound infection responded well to targeted topical and systemic antibiotic treatment. The 1% AgSD treated group (6 of 25, 24%) obtained more split thickness skin graft to close the granulation defects compared to patients who were treated with acticoat (4 of 25, 16%) but no statistical significance, p = 0.32). Average pain scores in the acticoat treated groups were significantly lower than the 1% AgSD treated group (4 +/- 0.6 versus 5 +/- 0.7, respectively).
                The present study confirms the efficacy of acticoat treatment in partial thickness burn wound. The authors conclude that acticoat has an advantage of limiting the frequency of replacement of the dressing and provides a less painful alternative to wound care with 1% AgSD with comparable incidence of burn wound infection. This is due to its long wear time and the ease of application and removal. The aim of this clinical trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of using lyophilised porcine skin (Xenoderm) compared with 1% silver sulfadiazine (SSD) in partial-thickness burns with regard to wound infection, length of hospital stay, number of dressings and doses of analgesics used (oral and injection).
                A total of 78 burns patients were included in this randomised study; their burns were caused by scalds or flames. They had second degree burns and had a burn area of 1060% of total body surface area (TBSA). Thirty-seven patients were treated with daily washing, followed by topical application of SSD dressing (the SSD group) and 39 with a biological dressing, i.e. Xenoderm (the Xenoderm group). The differences were evaluated using unpaired Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-square test.
                There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to age, gender, TBSA, cause of burn, and thickness of the burn or burn site. But there were significant differences regarding degree of wound infection, length of hospital stay, number of used dressings and given doses of analgesics.
                Xenoderm seems to be more effective than SSD dressing in terms of pain control, degree of wound infection, used wound dressings and length of hospital stay for partial-thickness burns. Prospective randomised studies are now necessary to compare possible reductions in the use of split thickness skin grafts and re-epithelialisation times. To compare topical diphenylhydantion (Phenytoin) with silver sulphadiazine/chlorhexidine (Silverex) in terms of rate of wound healing, analgesic and antibacterial properties in small to moderate-sized (< 30% TBSA) superficial dermal (second degree) burn wounds.
                A prospective randomized controlled study.
                Surgical wards, Muhimbili National Hospital from July 2000 to February 2001.
                Sixty four patients with acute burns, 32 in each group.
                Study group treated by sprinkling Phenytoin powder and control group by sprinkling Silverex powder on the wounds for 14 days or until the wound epithelialised or was ready for skin grafting. The data collected included demographic characteristics of patients, aetiology of burn injury, circumstances of injury, site and extent of burns, pus discharge and smell from the wound, pain and discomfort from the wound, bacterial cultures of wound swabs, rate of reduction in wound size and outcome of treatment.
                The study enrolled 33 male and 31 female patients, 69% being children under five years of age. Hot liquids (80%) and open flames (20%) were the only causes of burns. In 97% of patients injury was due to domestic accidents. In half of the patients burns involved the trunk, and 52% of all patients had less than 15% total body surface burnt. Pus discharge was recorded in 59% of Phenytoin-treated and 75% in Silverex-treated patients while foul smell was noted in 19% and 31% of cases respectively. There were more negative bacterial wound cultures in Phenytoin-than Silverex-treated wounds on day five and day 10 of treatment, the difference being statistically significant (p < 0.01 and 0.001 respectively). There was also a statistically significant difference in wound pain in favour of Phenytoin (p < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of healing in the two groups.
                Phenytoin is a cheap and easy-to-use medicament, effective in suppressing burn wound bacteria and relieving pain thereby promoting healing, and may be advocated for the purpose in resource-scarce environments.
There is insufficient evidence to establish whether silver-containing dressings or topical agents promote wound healing or prevent wound infection; some poor quality evidence for SSD suggests the opposite.