Cargando…

Comparison of a Novel Silicone Gel Wound Dressing vs Bacitracin After Follicular Unit Extraction Hair Transplantation

BACKGROUND: Follicular unit extraction (FUE) hair transplantation subjects are excellent candidates to assess wound dressings. The wound surface area is large and adequately delineated to allow randomization, while in-patient split scalp designs allow patients to serve as their own controls. OBJECTI...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: James, Isaac B, Turer, David M, DiBernardo, Barry E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8781770/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35072072
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/asjof/ojab051
_version_ 1784638159096643584
author James, Isaac B
Turer, David M
DiBernardo, Barry E
author_facet James, Isaac B
Turer, David M
DiBernardo, Barry E
author_sort James, Isaac B
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Follicular unit extraction (FUE) hair transplantation subjects are excellent candidates to assess wound dressings. The wound surface area is large and adequately delineated to allow randomization, while in-patient split scalp designs allow patients to serve as their own controls. OBJECTIVES: This randomized, single-blinded, split-scalp comparison trial compares a novel, film-forming silicone gel—Stratamed (SM; Stratpharma AG, Basel, Switzerland)—to Bacitracin (Bac; McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc., Richmond, VA) in subjects undergoing FUE. METHODS: Twenty subjects were randomized to receive SM and Bac on alternating sides of the scalp. Primary outcome measures included blinded clinician assessments of edema, erythema, crusting, healing response and outcome preference. Secondary measures included subject-reported assessments of pain and pruritis as well as FaceQ scores taken at post-FUE days two through six. RESULTS: Twenty subjects were enrolled. Nineteen completed the trial. All subjects were non-smokers, and none had medical comorbidities expected to impact wound healing. An average of 1778 follicles per subject were harvested. No adverse events were reported, and all subjects healed by day 7. Healing response and outcome preference were significantly higher at day 1 in the SM group and by day 7, both groups were similar. There were no significant differences between groups for edema, erythema, or crusting. There were no significant differences between groups for subject-reported outcomes of pain, pruritis, or FACE-Q scores. When asked which product they preferred using, 44% of subjects preferred using SM versus 22% who preferred Bac. CONCLUSIONS: The SM wound dressing was well-tolerated in patients undergoing FUE. SM may speed the healing response in the early phase of wound healing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2: [Image: see text]
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8781770
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87817702022-01-21 Comparison of a Novel Silicone Gel Wound Dressing vs Bacitracin After Follicular Unit Extraction Hair Transplantation James, Isaac B Turer, David M DiBernardo, Barry E Aesthet Surg J Open Forum Facial Surgery BACKGROUND: Follicular unit extraction (FUE) hair transplantation subjects are excellent candidates to assess wound dressings. The wound surface area is large and adequately delineated to allow randomization, while in-patient split scalp designs allow patients to serve as their own controls. OBJECTIVES: This randomized, single-blinded, split-scalp comparison trial compares a novel, film-forming silicone gel—Stratamed (SM; Stratpharma AG, Basel, Switzerland)—to Bacitracin (Bac; McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc., Richmond, VA) in subjects undergoing FUE. METHODS: Twenty subjects were randomized to receive SM and Bac on alternating sides of the scalp. Primary outcome measures included blinded clinician assessments of edema, erythema, crusting, healing response and outcome preference. Secondary measures included subject-reported assessments of pain and pruritis as well as FaceQ scores taken at post-FUE days two through six. RESULTS: Twenty subjects were enrolled. Nineteen completed the trial. All subjects were non-smokers, and none had medical comorbidities expected to impact wound healing. An average of 1778 follicles per subject were harvested. No adverse events were reported, and all subjects healed by day 7. Healing response and outcome preference were significantly higher at day 1 in the SM group and by day 7, both groups were similar. There were no significant differences between groups for edema, erythema, or crusting. There were no significant differences between groups for subject-reported outcomes of pain, pruritis, or FACE-Q scores. When asked which product they preferred using, 44% of subjects preferred using SM versus 22% who preferred Bac. CONCLUSIONS: The SM wound dressing was well-tolerated in patients undergoing FUE. SM may speed the healing response in the early phase of wound healing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2: [Image: see text] Oxford University Press 2021-12-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8781770/ /pubmed/35072072 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/asjof/ojab051 Text en © 2021 The Aesthetic Society. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Facial Surgery
James, Isaac B
Turer, David M
DiBernardo, Barry E
Comparison of a Novel Silicone Gel Wound Dressing vs Bacitracin After Follicular Unit Extraction Hair Transplantation
title Comparison of a Novel Silicone Gel Wound Dressing vs Bacitracin After Follicular Unit Extraction Hair Transplantation
title_full Comparison of a Novel Silicone Gel Wound Dressing vs Bacitracin After Follicular Unit Extraction Hair Transplantation
title_fullStr Comparison of a Novel Silicone Gel Wound Dressing vs Bacitracin After Follicular Unit Extraction Hair Transplantation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of a Novel Silicone Gel Wound Dressing vs Bacitracin After Follicular Unit Extraction Hair Transplantation
title_short Comparison of a Novel Silicone Gel Wound Dressing vs Bacitracin After Follicular Unit Extraction Hair Transplantation
title_sort comparison of a novel silicone gel wound dressing vs bacitracin after follicular unit extraction hair transplantation
topic Facial Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8781770/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35072072
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/asjof/ojab051
work_keys_str_mv AT jamesisaacb comparisonofanovelsiliconegelwounddressingvsbacitracinafterfollicularunitextractionhairtransplantation
AT turerdavidm comparisonofanovelsiliconegelwounddressingvsbacitracinafterfollicularunitextractionhairtransplantation
AT dibernardobarrye comparisonofanovelsiliconegelwounddressingvsbacitracinafterfollicularunitextractionhairtransplantation