Dataset Information

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of povidone-iodine foam dressing (Betafoam), hydrocellular foam dressing (Allevyn), and petrolatum gauze for split-thickness skin graft donor site dressing.

ABSTRACT: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of a povidone-iodine (PVP-I) foam dressing (Betafoam) for donor site dressing versus a hydrocellular foam dressing (Allevyn) and petrolatum gauze. This prospective Phase 4 study was conducted between March 2016 and April 2017 at eight sites in Korea. A total of 106 consenting patients (aged ≥ 19 years, scheduled for split-thickness skin graft) were randomised 1:1:1 to PVP-I foam, hydrocellular, or petrolatum gauze dressings for up to 28 days after donor site collection. We assessed time to complete epithelialisation, proportion with complete epithelialisation at Day 14, and wound infection. Epithelialisation time was the shortest with PVP-I foam dressing (12.74 ± 3.51 days) versus hydrocellular foam dressing (16.61 ± 4.45 days; P = 0.0003) and petrolatum gauze (15.06 ± 4.26 days, P = 0.0205). At Day 14, 83.87% of PVP-I foam dressing donor sites had complete epithelialisation, versus 36.36% of hydrocellular foam dressing donor sites (P = 0.0001) and 55.88% of petrolatum gauze donor sites (P = 0.0146). There were no wound infections. Incidence rates of adverse events were comparable across groups (P = 0.1940). PVP-I foam dressing required less time to complete epithelialisation and had a good safety profile.

SUBMITTER: Pak CS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7379600 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWound repair is one of the most complex biological processes of human life. Allogeneic cell-based engineered skin substitutes provide off-the-shelf temporary wound coverage and act as biologically active dressings, releasing growth factors, cytokines and extracellular matrix components essential for proper wound healing. However, they are susceptible to immune rejection and this is their major weakness. Thanks to their low immunogenicity and high effectiveness in regeneration, fetal skin cells represent an attractive alternative to the commonly used autologous and allogeneic skin grafts.Methods/designWe developed a new dressing comprising a collagen matrix seeded with a specific ratio of active fetal fibroblasts and keratinocytes. These produce a variety of healing growth factors and cytokines which will increase the speed of wound healing and induce an immunotolerant state, with a slight inflammatory reaction and a reduction in pain. The objective of this study is to demonstrate that the use of this biological dressing for wound healing at the split-thickness skin graft (STSG) donor site, reduces the time to healing, decreases other co-morbidities, such as pain, and improves the appearance of the scar. This investigation will be conducted as part of a randomized study comparing our new biological dressing with a conventional treatment in a single patient, thus avoiding the factors that may influence the healing of a graft donor site.DiscussionThis clinical trial should enable the development of a new strategy for STSG donor-wound healing based on a regenerative dressing. The pain experienced in the first few days of STSG healing is well known due to the exposure of sensory nerve endings. Reducing this pain will also reduce analgesic drug intake and the duration of sick leave. Our biological dressing will meet the essential need of surgeons to "re-crop" from existing donor sites, e.g., for thermal-burn patients. By accelerating healing, improving the appearance of the scar and reducing pain, we hope to improve the conditions of treatment for skin grafts.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03334656 . Registered on 7 November 2017.

Project description:BackgroundThe radial forearm free flap (RFFF) serves as a workhorse for a variety of reconstructions. Although there are a variety of surgical techniques for donor site closure after RFFF raising, the most common techniques are closure using a split-thickness skin graft (STSG) or a full-thickness skin graft (FTSG). The closure can result in wound complications and function and aesthetic compromise of the forearm and hand. The aim of the planned systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the wound-related, function-related and aesthetics-related outcome associated with full-thickness skin grafts (FTSG) and split-thickness skin grafts (STSG) in radial forearm free flap (RFFF) donor site closure.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines will be followed. Electronic databases and platforms (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI)) and clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, the German Clinical Trials Register, the ISRCTN registry, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) will be searched using predefined search terms until 15 January 2024. A rerun of the search will be carried out within 12 months before publication of the review. Eligible studies should report on the occurrence of donor site complications after raising an RFFF and closure of the defect. Included closure techniques are techniques that use full-thickness skin grafts and split-thickness skin grafts. Excluded techniques for closure are primary wound closure without the use of skin graft. Outcomes are considered wound-, functional-, and aesthetics-related. Studies that will be included are randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective and retrospective comparative cohort studies. Case-control studies, studies without a control group, animal studies and cadaveric studies will be excluded. Screening will be performed in a blinded fashion by two reviewers per study. A third reviewer resolves discrepancies. The risk of bias in the original studies will be assessed using the ROBINS-I and RoB 2 tools. Data synthesis will be done using Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4.1. If appropriate, a meta-analysis will be conducted. Between-study variability will be assessed using the I2 index. If necessary, R will be used. The quality of evidence for outcomes will eventually be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.DiscussionThis study's findings may help us understand both closure techniques' complication rates and may have important implications for developing future guidelines for RFFF donor site management. If available data is limited and several questions remain unanswered, additional comparative studies will be needed.Systematic review registrationThe protocol was developed in line with the PRISMA-P extension for protocols and was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 17 September 2023 (registration number CRD42023351903).

Dataset Information

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of povidone-iodine foam dressing (Betafoam), hydrocellular foam dressing (Allevyn), and petrolatum gauze for split-thickness skin graft donor site dressing.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets