New Topical Agents for Treatment of Partial-thickness Burns in Children: A Review of Published Outcome Studies
- 0 Comments
- 24186 reads
Abstract: Evidence-based choices for treating burns in children are not well defined. Skin substitutes and contemporary dressings offer potential advantages over traditional treatment with topical antimicrobial agents in treating partial-thickness burns. Newer treatment modalities may reduce morbidity, financial burdens, and scarring by accelerating healing.
Reports of pediatric burn management from 1997 to 2007 were reviewed to compare agent performance with outcome measures such as healing time, pain moderation, cosmetic results, and hospital costs. Transcyte™ (Smith & Nephew, London), Biobrane® (Bertek Pharmaceuticals Inc, Morgantown, WV), beta-glucan collagen, and Mepitel® (Mölnlycke, Göteborg, Sweden) have been reported as superior to silver sulfadiazine (SSD) in achieving faster healing times and decreased pain in pediatric patients.
Initial reports describing the outcomes achieved with these new agents indicate that they may offer clinical advantages in the treatment of partial-thickness burns in children. Increased costs of the new products appeared to be offset by decreases in hospital stay, nursing care time and pain medications. The existing literature is not conclusive, and prospective trials with standardized outcome measures are needed to better define the role of these agents.
Address correspondence to:
Wanda A. Dorsett-Martin, DVM
Division of Plastic Surgery
University of Mississippi Medical Center
2500 N. State Street
Jackson, MS 39216-4505
Children, especially those younger than 2 years, are at high risk for burn injury.1 Of 126,642 records of acute burn hospital admissions in the United States between 1995 and 2005, approximately 32% were younger than 20 years of age. 1 In the 6-year period from 1997 to 2002, there was an annual average of 78,000 children (birth–4 years old) treated in US ambulatory settings for injuries resulting from contact with a hot object or substance. 2 Natural curiosity, impulsiveness, lack of awareness of potential dangers, and limited ability to respond to a precarious situation in a prompt, appropriate manner, are factors leading to the high occurrence of burns in the pediatric population. 3,4
Scalding is the leading cause of burns in children younger than 3 years, and fire is the major cause of burns in older children. 5 Scald injuries usually occur in the home as a result of cooking accidents or use of excessively hot water during bathing. 6,7Accidental and neglect-related burns, although common, are not the only problem for the medical community; child abuse is the cause for many admissions. 5 Approximately 20% of pediatric burns are caused intentionally by a caregiver or parent. 8
The sheer volume of burn incidents, especially within a vulnerable population such as children, necessitates major medical resources dedicated to burn care. The ever-increasing financial pressures associated with health care also contribute to the need for effective, cost-efficient treatment options for burns. 9
Treatment of partial-thickness burns customarily involves early debridement of nonviable tissue. After debridement, the wound may be dressed with any of numerous dressings, which can be either biological, nonbiological, or a combination of these elements, in an effort to stimulate healing and provide protective covering for the wound. Pediatric burns traditionally have been treated with daily cleansing of the burn wound and application of topical antimicrobial agents. 10 Numerous carriers can be useful for burn treatment.
1. Miller SF, Bessey PQ, Schurr MJ, et al. National burn repository 2005: a ten-year review. J Burn Care Res. 2006;27(4):411–436.
2. Hammig BJ, Ogletree RJ. Burn injuries among infants and toddlers in the United States, 1997–2002. Am J Health Behav. 2006;30(3):259–267.
3. Lindblad BE, Terkelsen CJ. Domestic burns among children. Burns. 1990;16(4):254–256.
4. Delatte SJ, Evans J, Hebra A, et al. Effectiveness of beta-glucan collagen for treatment of partial-thickness burns in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2001;36(1):113–118.
5. Bishop JF. Pediatric considerations in the use of Biobrane in burn wound management. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1995;16(3 Pt 1):331–334.
6. Ou LF, Lee SY, Chen YC, Yang RS, Tang YW. Use of Biobrane in pediatric scald burns-experience in 106 children. Burns.1998;24(1):49–53.
7. Lal S, Barrow RE, Wolf SE, et al. Biobrane improves wound healing in burned children without increased risk of infection. Shock. 2000;14(3):314–319.
8. Passaretti D, Billmire DA. Management of pediatric burns. J Craniofac Surg. 2003;14(5):713–718
9. Lukish JR, Eichelberger MR, Newman KD, et al. The use of a bioactive skin substitute decreases length of stay for pediatric burn patients. J Pediatr Surg. 2001;36(8):1118–1121.
10. Barret JP, Dziewulski P, Ramzy PI, et al. Biobrane versus 1% silver sulfadiazine in second-degree pediatric burns. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105(1):62–65.
11. Palmieri TL, Greenhalgh DG. Topical treatment of pediatric patients with burns: a practical guide. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2002;3(8):529–534.
12. Alsbjörn BF. Biologic wound coverings in burn treatment. World J Surg. 1992;16(1):43–46.
13. Boyce ST. Design principles for composition and performance of cultured skin substitutes. Burns. 2001;27(5):523–533.
14. US National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health. Medline plus drug information for Silver Sulfadiazine. Available at: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/medmaster/a682598.html. Accessed April 3, 2007.
15. Cassidy C, St Peter SD, Lacey S, et al. Biobrane versus Duoderm for the treatment of intermediate thickness burns in children: a prospective, randomized trial. Burns. 2005;31(7):890–893.
16. Bugmann P, Taylor S, Gyger D, et al. A silicone-coated nylon dressing reduces healing time in burned paediatric patients in comparison with standard sulfadiazine treatment: a prospective randomized trial. Burns. 1998;24(7):609–612.
17. Klein RL, Rothmann BF, Marshall R. Biobrane—a useful adjunct in the therapy of outpatient burns. J Pediatr Surg. 1984;19(6):846–847.
18. Phillips LG, Robson MC, Smith DJ, et al. Uses and abuses of a biosynthetic dressing for partial skin thickness burns. Burns. 1989;15(4):254–256.
19. Lin SD, Chai CY, Lai CS, Chou CK. A mixture of allogeneic and autologous microskin grafting of rabbit skin wounds with Biobrane overlay. Burns. 1994;20(1):30–35.
20. Smith DJ Jr. Use of Biobrane in wound management. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1995;16(3 Pt 1):317–320.
21. Smith and Nephew Wound Management. Transcyte. Available at: http://wound.smith-nephew.com. Accessed: December 14, 2005.
22. Noordenbos J, Doré C, Hansbrough JF. Safety and efficacy of TransCyte for the treatment of partial-thickness burns. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1999;20(4):275–281.
23. Gotschall CS, Morrison MI, Eichelberger MR. Prospective, randomized study of the efficacy of Mepitel on children with partial-thickness scalds. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1998;19(4):279–283.
24. Kumar RJ, Kimble RM, Boots R, Pegg SP. Treatment of partial-thickness burns: a prospective, randomized trial using Transcyte. ANZ J Surg. 2004;74(8):622–626.
25. Hassan Z, Shah M. Punctate scarring from use of porous Biobrane. Burns. 2006;32(2):258–260.
26. Williams G, Withey S, Walker CC. Longstanding pigmentary changes in paediatric scalds with a non-adherent siliconised dressing. Burns. 2001;27(2):200–202.
27. Jones I, Currie L, Martin R. A guide to biological skin substitutes. Br J Plast Surg. 2002;55(3):185–193.
28. Gibran NS; Committee on Organization and Delivery of Burn Care, American Burn Association. Practice Guidelines for burn care, 2006. J Burn Care Res. 2006;27(4):437–438.
29. Mandal A. Paediatric partial-thickness scald burns—is Biobrane the best treatment available? Int Wound J. 2007;4(1):15–19.
30. Lang EM, Eiberg CA, Brandis M, Stark GB. Biobrane in the treatment of burn and scald injuries in children. Ann Plastic Surg. 2005;55(5):485–489.
31. Sheridan RL, Tompkins RG. Skin substitutes in burns. Burns. 1999;25(2):97–103.