-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2016Acute toxoplasma retinochoroiditis causes transient symptoms of ocular discomfort and may lead to permanent visual loss. Antibiotic treatment aims primarily to reduce... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute toxoplasma retinochoroiditis causes transient symptoms of ocular discomfort and may lead to permanent visual loss. Antibiotic treatment aims primarily to reduce the risk of permanent visual loss, recurrent retinochoroiditis, and the severity and duration of acute symptoms. There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of antibiotic treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effects of antibiotic treatment versus placebo or no treatment for toxoplasma retinochoroiditis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision group Trials Register) (2016, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to February 2016), EMBASE (January 1980 to February 2016), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to February 2016), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 22 February 2016. We searched the reference lists of identified articles and contacted pharmaceutical companies for unpublished trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials that compared any antibiotic treatment against placebo or no treatment. We excluded trials that included immunocompromised participants. We considered any antibiotic treatment known to be active against Toxoplasma gondii. Antibiotic treatment could be given in any dose orally, by intramuscular injection, by intravenous infusion, or by intravitreal injection.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The primary outcomes for this review were visual acuity at least three months after treatment and risk of recurrent retinochoroiditis. Secondary outcomes were improvement in symptoms and signs of intraocular inflammation, size of lesion, and adverse events. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
Four trials that randomised a total of 268 participants met the inclusion criteria. In all four studies antibiotic was administered orally.One study conducted in Brazil in both adults and children compared trimethoprim-sulfamexacocol over 20 months to no treatment and was judged to be at high risk of performance, detection, and attrition bias. The other three studies compared antibiotic treatment to placebo. We judged these three studies to be at a mixture of low or unclear risk of bias due to poor reporting. One study conducted in the US in adults studied pyrimethamine-trisulfapyrimidine for eight weeks; one study conducted in the UK in children and adults evaluated pyrimethamine for four weeks; and one study conducted in Brazil in adults investigated trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for 12 months. In the last study, all participants had active retinochoroiditis and were treated with antibiotics for 45 days prior to randomisation to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus placebo.Only the study in Brazil of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole over 12 months, in participants with healed lesions, reported the effect of treatment on visual acuity. People treated with antibiotics may have a similar change in visual acuity compared with people treated with placebo at one year (mean difference -1.00 letters, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.93 to 5.93 letters; 93 participants; low-quality evidence).Treatment with antibiotics probably reduces the risk of recurrent retinochoroiditis compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.63; 227 participants; 3 studies; I(2) = 0%; moderate-quality evidence); similar results were seen for acute and chronic retinochoroiditis.The UK study of pyrimethamine for four weeks reported an improvement in intraocular inflammation in treated compared with control participants (RR 1.76, 95% CI 0.98 to 3.19; 29 participants; low-quality evidence). The study in Brazil of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for 12 months stated that the severity of inflammation was higher in the comparator group when compared to the antibiotic-treated group but did not provide further details. In the US study of pyrimethamine-trisulfapyrimidine for eight weeks intraocular inflammation had almost completely resolved by eight weeks in all participants, however in this study all participants received steroid treatment.Two studies (UK and US studies) reported an increased risk of adverse events in treated participants. These were a fall in haemoglobin, leucocyte, and platelet count, nausea, loss of appetite, rash, and arthralgia.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Treatment with antibiotics probably reduces the risk of recurrent toxoplasma retinochoroiditis, but there is currently no good evidence that this leads to better visual outcomes. However, absence of evidence of effect is not the same as evidence of no effect. Further trials of people with acute and chronic toxoplasma retinochoroiditis affecting any part of the retina are required to determine the effects of antibiotic treatment on visual outcomes.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Chorioretinitis; Drug Combinations; Humans; Pyrimethamine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Secondary Prevention; Sulfadiazine; Sulfamerazine; Sulfamethazine; Toxoplasmosis, Ocular; Trimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination; Visual Acuity; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 27198629
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002218.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2020Burn injuries are an important health problem. They occur frequently in the head and neck region. The face is the area central to a person's identity that provides our...
BACKGROUND
Burn injuries are an important health problem. They occur frequently in the head and neck region. The face is the area central to a person's identity that provides our most expressive means of communication. Topical interventions are currently the cornerstone of treatment of burns to the face.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of topical interventions on wound healing in people with facial burns of any depth.
SEARCH METHODS
In December 2019 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of topical treatment for facial burns were eligible for inclusion in this review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
In this first update, we included 12 RCTs, comprising 507 participants. Most trials included adults admitted to specialised burn centres after recent burn injuries. Topical agents included antimicrobial agents (silver sulphadiazine (SSD), Aquacel-Ag, cerium-sulphadiazine, gentamicin cream, mafenide acetate cream, bacitracin), non-antimicrobial agents (Moist Exposed Burn Ointment (MEBO), saline-soaked dressings, skin substitutes (including bioengineered skin substitute (TransCyte), allograft, and xenograft (porcine Xenoderm), and miscellaneous treatments (growth hormone therapy, recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor hydrogel (rhGMCS)), enzymatic debridement, and cream with Helix Aspersa extract). Almost all the evidence included in this review was assessed as low or very low-certainty, often because of high risk of bias due to unclear randomisation procedures (i.e. sequence generation and allocation concealment); lack of blinding of participants, providers and sometimes outcome assessors; and imprecision resulting from few participants, low event rates or both, often in single studies. Topical antimicrobial agents versus topical non-antimicrobial agents There is moderate-certainty evidence that there is probably little or no difference between antimicrobial agents and non-antimicrobial agents (SSD and MEBO) in time to complete wound healing (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.85, 1 study, 39 participants). Topical antimicrobial agents may make little or no difference to the proportion of wounds completely healed compared with topical non-antimicrobial agents (comparison SSD and MEBO, risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.29; 1 study, 39 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in wound infection (comparison topical antimicrobial agent (Aquacel-Ag) and MEBO; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.21; 1 study, 40 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported change in wound surface area over time or partial wound healing. There is low-certainty evidence for the secondary outcomes scar quality and patient satisfaction. Two studies assessed pain but it was incompletely reported. Topical antimicrobial agents versus other topical antimicrobial agents It is uncertain whether topical antimicrobial agents make any difference in effects as the evidence is low to very low-certainty. For primary outcomes, there is low-certainty evidence for time to partial (i.e. greater than 90%) wound healing (comparison SSD versus cerium SSD: mean difference (MD) -7.10 days, 95% CI -16.43 to 2.23; 1 study, 142 participants). There is very low-certainty evidence regarding whether topical antimicrobial agents make a difference to wound infection (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.17; 1 study, 15 participants). There is low to very low-certainty evidence for the proportion of facial burns requiring surgery, pain, scar quality, adverse effects and length of hospital stay. Skin substitutes versus topical antimicrobial agents There is low-certainty evidence that a skin substitute may slightly reduce time to partial (i.e. greater than 90%) wound healing, compared with a non-specified antibacterial agent (MD -6.00 days, 95% CI -8.69 to -3.31; 1 study, 34 participants). We are uncertain whether skin substitutes in general make any other difference in effects as the evidence is very low certainty. Outcomes included wound infection, pain, scar quality, adverse effects of treatment and length of hospital stay. Single studies showed contrasting low-certainty evidence. A bioengineered skin substitute may slightly reduce procedural pain (MD -4.00, 95% CI -5.05 to -2.95; 34 participants) and background pain (MD -2.00, 95% CI -3.05 to -0.95; 34 participants) compared with an unspecified antimicrobial agent. In contrast, a biological dressing (porcine Xenoderm) might slightly increase pain in superficial burns (MD 1.20, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.75; 15 participants (30 wounds)) as well as deep partial thickness burns (MD 3.00, 95% CI 2.34 to 3.66; 10 participants (20 wounds)), compared with antimicrobial agents (Physiotulle Ag (Coloplast)). Miscellaneous treatments versus miscellaneous treatments Single studies show low to very low-certainty effects of interventions. Low-certainty evidence shows that MEBO may slightly reduce time to complete wound healing compared with saline soaked dressing (MD -1.7 days, 95% CI -3.32 to -0.08; 40 participants). In addition, a cream containing Helix Aspersa may slightly increase the proportion of wounds completely healed at 14 days compared with MEBO (RR 4.77, 95% CI 1.87 to 12.15; 43 participants). We are uncertain whether any miscellaneous treatment in the included studies makes a difference in effects for the outcomes wound infection, scar quality, pain and patient satisfaction as the evidence is low to very low-certainty.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is mainly low to very low-certainty evidence on the effects of any topical intervention on wound healing in people with facial burns. The number of RCTs in burn care is growing, but the body of evidence is still hampered due to an insufficient number of studies that follow appropriate evidence-based standards of conducting and reporting RCTs.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Anti-Infective Agents; Bias; Burns; Carboxymethylcellulose Sodium; Facial Injuries; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin, Artificial; Wound Healing
PubMed: 32725896
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008058.pub3 -
Annals of Intensive Care Jun 2018Catheter-related blood-stream infections (CRBSIs) are the most common complication when using central venous catheters (CVCs). Whether coating CVCs under bundles could... (Review)
Review
Effectiveness of antimicrobial-coated central venous catheters for preventing catheter-related blood-stream infections with the implementation of bundles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Catheter-related blood-stream infections (CRBSIs) are the most common complication when using central venous catheters (CVCs). Whether coating CVCs under bundles could further reduce the incidence of CRBSIs is unclear. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of implementing the use of bundles with antimicrobial-coated CVCs for preventing catheter-related blood-stream infections.
METHODS
In this systematic review and network meta-analyses, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library in addition to the EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases for studies published before July 2017. The primary outcome was the rate of CRBSIs per 1000 catheter-days, and the secondary outcome was the incidence of catheter colonization.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies revealed significant differences in the rate of CRBSIs per 1000 catheter-days between antimicrobial-impregnated and standard CVCs (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.91, p = 0.008). Thirty-three trials were included containing 10,464 patients who received one of four types of CVCs. Compared with a standard catheter, chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine- and antibiotic-coated catheters were associated with lower numbers of CRBSIs per 1000 catheter-days (ORs and 95% CrIs: 0.64 (0.40-0.955) and 0.53 (0.25-0.95), respectively) and a lower incidence of catheter colonization (ORs and 95% CrIs: 0.44 (0.34-0.56) and 0.30 (0.20-0.46), respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Outcomes are superior for catheters impregnated with chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine or other antibiotics than for standard catheters in preventing CRBSIs and catheter colonization under bundles. Compared with silver ion-impregnated CVCs, chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine antiseptic catheters resulted in fewer cases of microbial colonization of the catheter but did not reduce CRBSIs.
PubMed: 29904809
DOI: 10.1186/s13613-018-0416-4 -
Burns : Journal of the International... Mar 2019The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to compare the effect of Silver Sulfadiazine (SSD) with other new dressings, with or without silver, on healing... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to compare the effect of Silver Sulfadiazine (SSD) with other new dressings, with or without silver, on healing and infection prevention in burns. The electronic search was carried out in the electronic databases of Pubmed, ScienceDirect, Lilacs and BVS. The articles included were randomized clinical trials about burn treatment with SSD, which evaluated the healing and infection of burn wounds in humans. The exclusion criteria included articles, editorials and letters published in the form of abstracts, unpublished reports and case series, cross-sectional, observational experimental studies, and the use of sulfadiazine for other types of wounds. The search identified 873 references, and 24 studies were included in accordance with the eligibility criteria. The results showed a statistically favorable difference related to the time of healing for silver dressings (p<0.0001; MD 3.83; 95% CI 2.03-5.62) and dressings without silver (p<0.007; MD 2.9; 95% CI 0.81-5.00) in comparison with SSD. The rate of infection showed no difference in the group treated with SSD compared with the group treated with dressings containing silver (p>0.05). The rate of infection was significantly higher in the SSD group compared with the group treated with dressings without silver (p<0.005; MD 25.29% and MD 12.97%). Considering the clinical trials conducted up to the present time, the authors concluded that new dressings with and without silver show better results than SSD for wound healing, and burns treated with dressings without silver are less likely to become infected than burns with SSD. No differences between SSD and new silver materials were observed in relation to infection prevention.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Bandages; Burns; Humans; Occlusive Dressings; Silver Sulfadiazine; Wound Healing; Wound Infection
PubMed: 29903603
DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2018.05.014 -
Interactive Journal of Medical Research Mar 2023Hematological malignancies disturb the blood, lymph nodes, and bone marrow. Taking medications for treating opportunistic infections (OIs) in these individuals may... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hematological malignancies disturb the blood, lymph nodes, and bone marrow. Taking medications for treating opportunistic infections (OIs) in these individuals may enhance the risk of medication interaction as well as adverse drug reactions.
OBJECTIVE
This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of nondrug interventions in reducing OIs among patients with hematological cancers.
METHODS
The PubMed, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Embase databases were searched on December 26, 2022, for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary endpoint was OIs. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool.
RESULTS
A total of 6 studies were included in this review with 4 interventions: (1) types of mouthwash received, (2) presence of coating on central venous catheters (CVCs), (3) use of well-fitted masks, and (4) types of diet consumed. The results were presented in 8 different comparisons: (1) chlorhexidine-nystatin versus saline mouth rinse, (2) chlorhexidine versus saline mouth rinse, (3) nystatin versus saline mouth rinse, (4) chlorhexidine silver sulfadiazine-coated CVCs versus uncoated catheters, (5) well-fitted masks versus no mask, (6) amine fluoride-stannous fluoride versus sodium fluoride mouthwash, (7) low-bacterial diet versus standard hospital diet, and (8) herbal versus placebo mouthwash. No clear differences were reported in any of the outcomes examined in the first 3 comparisons. There were also no clear differences in the rate of catheter-related bloodstream infection or insertion site infection between the use of chlorhexidine silver sulfadiazine-coated CVCs versus uncoated catheters in the patients. Further, no significant differences were seen between patients who used a well-fitted mask and those without a mask in the incidence of OI. The all-cause mortality and mortality due to OI were similar between the 2 groups. There was no clear difference in all-cause mortality, although common adverse effects were reported in patients who used sodium fluoride mouthwash compared with those using amine fluoride-stannous fluoride mouthwash. There was no evidence of any difference in the incidence of possible invasive aspergillosis or candidemia between patients who consumed a low-bacterial diet and a standard diet. For the last comparison, no significant difference was seen between patients who received herbal and placebo mouthwash.
CONCLUSIONS
Very limited evidence was available to measure the effectiveness of nondrug interventions in hematological cancers. The effectiveness of the interventions included in this review needs to be evaluated further in high-quality RCTs in a dedicated setting among patients with hematological malignancies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020169186; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=169186.
PubMed: 37000482
DOI: 10.2196/43969 -
Journal of Wound Care Apr 2022This study aims to assess the wound healing efficacy in second-degree burns in rats treated with 1% silver sulfadiazine (SSD)-a sulfonamide antibiotic. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to assess the wound healing efficacy in second-degree burns in rats treated with 1% silver sulfadiazine (SSD)-a sulfonamide antibiotic.
METHOD
This is a systematic literature review and meta-analysis performed according to the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes) strategy.
RESULTS
The review found 100 studies in PubMed, Web of Science and other search engines. Of these, 70 studies were pre-selected after removing duplicates. After independent analysis by two reviewers, only seven studies met the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. All studies except one showed faster wound closure by the application of silver sulfadiazine ointment. Using a random effects model, healing was faster in SSD-treated groups when compared to the control group on day 21, with a statistically significant mean difference of -2.72 days (95% confidence interval: -4.99, -0.45) between treatment and control groups (p<0.01).
CONCLUSION
The results of this meta-analysis revealed that SSD aided in faster healing of second-degree burns.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Burns; Humans; Ointments; Rats; Silver Sulfadiazine; Soft Tissue Injuries; Wound Healing
PubMed: 35404714
DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2022.31.Sup4.S31 -
JAC-antimicrobial Resistance Mar 2020Catheter infections remain one of the most persistent adverse events causing significant morbidity, economic impact and mortality. Several strategies have been proposed... (Review)
Review
The potential for developing new antimicrobial resistance from the use of medical devices containing chlorhexidine, minocycline, rifampicin and their combinations: a systematic review.
BACKGROUND
Catheter infections remain one of the most persistent adverse events causing significant morbidity, economic impact and mortality. Several strategies have been proposed to reduce these infections including the use of catheters embedded with antibiotics and/or antiseptics. One reoccurring challenge is the fear that antimicrobial medical devices will induce resistance. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the evidence for induced antimicrobial resistance caused by exposure to antimicrobial medical devices.
METHODS
Four electronic databases [MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Scopus] were screened for studies published between 1983 and 2019 regarding assessment of microbial resistance with use of medical devices containing chlorhexidine, minocycline, rifampicin or combinations thereof. Development of new resistance, selection for tolerant organisms and 'no change in resistance' were assessed.
RESULTS
Forty-four publications, grouped by study type and stratified by drug assessed, were included for analyses. The majority of studies found no change in resistance after exposure to antimicrobial medical devices (13 , 2 , 20 clinical). Development of new resistance was commonly reported with the use of rifampicin as a single agent and only reported in one study assessing the minocycline/rifampicin combination (M/R); however, the increase in MIC was well below clinical relevance.
CONCLUSIONS
Emergence of new resistance to combinations of M/R, minocycline/rifampicin/chlorhexidine (M/R/CH) and chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine (CHXSS) was rare. No clinical trials confirmed its occurrence and some refuted it. The risk of development of new resistance to these antimicrobial combinations appears more fear-based than substantiated by clinical and experimental evidence but warrants continued surveillance.
PubMed: 34222960
DOI: 10.1093/jacamr/dlaa002 -
Burns : Journal of the International... Feb 2017Evidence from animal studies and trials suggests that honey may accelerate wound healing. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of honey compared with... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Evidence from animal studies and trials suggests that honey may accelerate wound healing. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of honey compared with silver dressings on the healing of burn wounds. Relevant databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of honey compared with silver sulfadiazine (SSD) were searched. The quality of the selected trials was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. The primary endpoints considered were wound healing time and the number of infected wounds rendered sterile. Nine RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Based on moderate quality evidence there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups, favoring honey in healing time (MD -5.76days, 95% CI -8.14 to -3.39) and the proportions of infected wounds rendered sterile (RR 2.59; 95% CI 1.58-2.88). The available evidence suggests that honey dressings promote better wound healing than silver sulfadiazine for burns.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Bandages; Burns; Honey; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Silver Sulfadiazine; Wound Healing; Wound Infection
PubMed: 27576926
DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2016.07.004 -
Wound Repair and Regeneration :... Aug 2017Silver-containing products play an important role in the management of burn wound infections. We sought to compare the efficacy of commonly used silver delivery... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Silver-containing products play an important role in the management of burn wound infections. We sought to compare the efficacy of commonly used silver delivery approaches including nanocrystalline silver, silver-impregnated hydrofiber dressing, and silver-impregnated foam dressing as the main products in the management of partial thickness burns. A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and other databases to identify relevant randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Due to the paucity of direct head-to-head trials, an indirect treatment comparison was performed. The use of nanocrystalline silver was associated with a statistically significant reduction in length of stay when compared to silver-impregnated hydrofiber dressing (p = 0.027) and a shorter time to healing when compared to silver-impregnated foam dressing (p = 0.0328). There were no statistically significant differences in infection rates and surgical procedures between nanocrystalline silver, silver-impregnated hydrofiber dressing, and silver-impregnated foam dressing; however, nanocrystalline silver was found to be the most beneficial for all the outcomes, including infection rates and surgical procedures, according to the Monte Carlo simulation method. In conclusion, current evidence from the published literature suggests that where the clinical and microbiological priority is to get in control of infection quickly it would seem prudent to use the most potent silver delivery system, which is nanocrystalline silver. Nanocrystalline silver may offer both clinical and economic benefits compared to alternative treatments in the management of patients with mixed burns that are at high risk of infection.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Bandages; Burns; Humans; Silver Sulfadiazine; Trauma Severity Indices; Treatment Outcome; Wound Healing
PubMed: 28742235
DOI: 10.1111/wrr.12559 -
Journal of Burn Care & Research :... 2015After a burn injury, superficial partial-thickness burn wounds may progress to deep partial-thickness or full-thickness burn wounds, if kept untreated. This phenomenon... (Review)
Review
After a burn injury, superficial partial-thickness burn wounds may progress to deep partial-thickness or full-thickness burn wounds, if kept untreated. This phenomenon is called secondary burn wound progression or conversion. Burn wound depth is an important determinant of patient morbidity and mortality. Therefore, reduction or even the prevention of secondary burn wound progression is one goal of the acute care of burned patients. The objective of this study was to review preclinical approaches evaluating therapies to reduce burn wound progression. A systematic review of experimental approaches in animals that aim at reducing or preventing secondary burn wound progression was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The selected references consist of all the peer-reviewed studies performed in vivo in animals and review articles published in English, German, Italian, Spanish, or French language relevant to the topic of secondary burn wound progression. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar including all the articles published from the beginning of notations to the present. The search was conducted between May 3, 2012 and December 26, 2013. We included 29 experimental studies in this review, investigating agents that maintain or increase local perfusion conditions, as well as agents that exhibit an anti-coagulatory, an anti-inflammatory, or an anti-apoptotic property. Warm water, simvastatin, EPO, or cerium nitrate may represent particularly promising approaches for the translation into clinical use in the near future. This review demonstrates promising experimental approaches that might reduce secondary burn wound progression. Nevertheless, a translation into clinical application needs to confirm the results compiled in experimental animal studies.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Burns; Disease Models, Animal; Graft Survival; Silver Sulfadiazine; Skin; Wound Healing; Wound Infection
PubMed: 25094011
DOI: 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000131