Cargando…

A clinical comparison of pure knitted silk and a complex synthetic skin substitute for the treatment of partial thickness burns

Currently, many dressings are commercially available for the treatment of burn wounds. Some of these wound dressings remain on the wound, prevent painful dressing changes, and reduce tissue scarring. Nevertheless, still a wound dressing that is cost‐effective, produces good wound healing properties,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schiefer, Jennifer Lynn, Andreae, Janine, Bagheri, Mahsa, Fuchs, Paul Christian, Lefering, Rolf, Heitzmann, Wolfram, Schulz, Alexandra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8684860/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33973387
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13613
_version_ 1784617707566530560
author Schiefer, Jennifer Lynn
Andreae, Janine
Bagheri, Mahsa
Fuchs, Paul Christian
Lefering, Rolf
Heitzmann, Wolfram
Schulz, Alexandra
author_facet Schiefer, Jennifer Lynn
Andreae, Janine
Bagheri, Mahsa
Fuchs, Paul Christian
Lefering, Rolf
Heitzmann, Wolfram
Schulz, Alexandra
author_sort Schiefer, Jennifer Lynn
collection PubMed
description Currently, many dressings are commercially available for the treatment of burn wounds. Some of these wound dressings remain on the wound, prevent painful dressing changes, and reduce tissue scarring. Nevertheless, still a wound dressing that is cost‐effective, produces good wound healing properties, and has a high patient satisfaction is needed. Standard care of superficial burn wounds differs between burn centres. This study aimed to determine a dressing with easy appliance, accurate pain control, favourable outcome, and cost‐effectiveness. Therefore, we compared the widely used but expensive Suprathel with the rather new but much cheaper Dressilk in the clinical setting. In a prospective clinical study, the healing of partial thickness burn wounds after simultaneous treatment with Suprathel and Dressilk was examined in 20 patients intra‐individually. During wound healing, pain, infection, exudation, and bleeding were evaluated. A subjective scar evaluation was performed using the Patient and Observer Scar Scale. Both dressings were easy to apply, remained on the wound in place, and were gradually cut back as reepithelisation proceeded and showed similar times to wound closure. Dressing changes were not necessary, and neither infections nor bleeding was detected. Overall exudation and pain were highest in the beginning but declined during the wound‐healing phase without significant differences. In the follow‐up scar evaluation after 12 months, patients reported overall high satisfaction. Overall, the modern dressings Suprathel and Dressilk (solely made out of pure silk) led to safe wound healing without infection and rapidly reduced pain. There was no need for dressing changes, and they had similar clinical outcomes in scar evaluation. Therefore, both dressings seem to be ideal for the treatment of superficial burns. Because acquisition costs remain one of the main factors in the treatment of burns, Dressilk, which is ~20 times cheaper than Suprathel, remains a good option for the treatment of partial thickness burns.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8684860
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86848602021-12-30 A clinical comparison of pure knitted silk and a complex synthetic skin substitute for the treatment of partial thickness burns Schiefer, Jennifer Lynn Andreae, Janine Bagheri, Mahsa Fuchs, Paul Christian Lefering, Rolf Heitzmann, Wolfram Schulz, Alexandra Int Wound J Original Articles Currently, many dressings are commercially available for the treatment of burn wounds. Some of these wound dressings remain on the wound, prevent painful dressing changes, and reduce tissue scarring. Nevertheless, still a wound dressing that is cost‐effective, produces good wound healing properties, and has a high patient satisfaction is needed. Standard care of superficial burn wounds differs between burn centres. This study aimed to determine a dressing with easy appliance, accurate pain control, favourable outcome, and cost‐effectiveness. Therefore, we compared the widely used but expensive Suprathel with the rather new but much cheaper Dressilk in the clinical setting. In a prospective clinical study, the healing of partial thickness burn wounds after simultaneous treatment with Suprathel and Dressilk was examined in 20 patients intra‐individually. During wound healing, pain, infection, exudation, and bleeding were evaluated. A subjective scar evaluation was performed using the Patient and Observer Scar Scale. Both dressings were easy to apply, remained on the wound in place, and were gradually cut back as reepithelisation proceeded and showed similar times to wound closure. Dressing changes were not necessary, and neither infections nor bleeding was detected. Overall exudation and pain were highest in the beginning but declined during the wound‐healing phase without significant differences. In the follow‐up scar evaluation after 12 months, patients reported overall high satisfaction. Overall, the modern dressings Suprathel and Dressilk (solely made out of pure silk) led to safe wound healing without infection and rapidly reduced pain. There was no need for dressing changes, and they had similar clinical outcomes in scar evaluation. Therefore, both dressings seem to be ideal for the treatment of superficial burns. Because acquisition costs remain one of the main factors in the treatment of burns, Dressilk, which is ~20 times cheaper than Suprathel, remains a good option for the treatment of partial thickness burns. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2021-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8684860/ /pubmed/33973387 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13613 Text en © 2021 The Authors. International Wound Journal published by Medicalhelplines.com Inc (3M) and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Schiefer, Jennifer Lynn
Andreae, Janine
Bagheri, Mahsa
Fuchs, Paul Christian
Lefering, Rolf
Heitzmann, Wolfram
Schulz, Alexandra
A clinical comparison of pure knitted silk and a complex synthetic skin substitute for the treatment of partial thickness burns
title A clinical comparison of pure knitted silk and a complex synthetic skin substitute for the treatment of partial thickness burns
title_full A clinical comparison of pure knitted silk and a complex synthetic skin substitute for the treatment of partial thickness burns
title_fullStr A clinical comparison of pure knitted silk and a complex synthetic skin substitute for the treatment of partial thickness burns
title_full_unstemmed A clinical comparison of pure knitted silk and a complex synthetic skin substitute for the treatment of partial thickness burns
title_short A clinical comparison of pure knitted silk and a complex synthetic skin substitute for the treatment of partial thickness burns
title_sort clinical comparison of pure knitted silk and a complex synthetic skin substitute for the treatment of partial thickness burns
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8684860/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33973387
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13613
work_keys_str_mv AT schieferjenniferlynn aclinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT andreaejanine aclinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT bagherimahsa aclinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT fuchspaulchristian aclinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT leferingrolf aclinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT heitzmannwolfram aclinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT schulzalexandra aclinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT schieferjenniferlynn clinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT andreaejanine clinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT bagherimahsa clinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT fuchspaulchristian clinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT leferingrolf clinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT heitzmannwolfram clinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns
AT schulzalexandra clinicalcomparisonofpureknittedsilkandacomplexsyntheticskinsubstituteforthetreatmentofpartialthicknessburns