• Matilda Karlsson, Moustafa Elmasry, Ingrid Steinvall, Fredrik Huss, Pia Olofsson, Sherif Elawa, Alexander Larsson, and Folke Sjöberg.
• Department of Hand Surgery, Plastic Surgery and Burns, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. Electronic address: Matilda.Karlsson@regionostergotland.se.
• Burns. 2022 Aug 1; 48 (5): 1236-1245.

AimThe aim was to compare two dressing treatments for partial-thickness burns: biosynthetic cellulose dressing (BsC) (Epiprotect® S2Medical AB, Linköping, Sweden) and porcine xenograft (EZ Derm®, Mölnlycke Health Care, Gothenburg, Sweden).MethodsTwenty-four adults with partial-thickness burns were included in this randomized clinical trial conducted at The Burn Centers in Linköping and Uppsala, Sweden between June 2016 and November 2018. Time to healing was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were wound infection, pain, impact on everyday life, length of hospital stay, cost, and burn scar outcome (evaluated with POSAS).ResultsWe found no significant differences between the two dressing groups regarding time to healing, wound infection, pain, impact on everyday life, duration of hospital stay, cost, or burn scar outcome at the first follow up. Burn scar outcome at the 12-month follow up showed that the porcine xenograft group patients scored their scars higher on the POSAS items thickness (p = 0.048) and relief (p = 0.050). This difference was, however, not confirmed by the observer.ConclusionsThe results showed the dressings performed similarly when used in adults with burns evaluated as partial thickness.Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

19 keywords...

hide…