Here - EWMA 2013

EP 471
IN VITRO ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT WOUND DRESSINGS ON
THE SKIN OR WOUND SURFACE USING A GELATIN-BASED TISSUE MODEL
Conclusions: This in vitro study employed a gelatine-based tissue substitute to evaluate
the adhesion proclivity of dressings to and the effect on skin or wound surface in vitro. It
could be shown that all dressings increased surface roughness during treatment;
however, significant differences between the dressings tested were observed.
* References: A:Suprasorb ® P+WCL / B:Suprasorb ® Pnonadhesive, Lohmann&Rauscher;
C:Mepilex ® border / D:Mepilex ® nonborder; MölnlyckeHealthCare; E:Allevyngentle /
F:Allevynnonadhesive; Smith&Nephew
** PRIMOS
E-Poster: Dressings
EP 470
Treatment of Severe 2nd and 3rd Degree Burns with Enzyme
ALGINATE GEL* – Is There a “Jack of all Trades” for Topical Agents?
E-Poster: Dressings
Haik Josef 1 , Trivizki Omer 1 , Harats Moti 1 , Farber Nimrod 1 , Winkler Eyal 1 ,
Cornelia Wiegand 1 , Steffen Springer 1 , Martin Abel 2 , Peter Ruth 2 , Uta-Christina Hipler 1
Weissman Oren 1
1 Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center Jena (Jena, Germany);
1 Sheba Medical Center, Department of plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and
The Burn Unit (Ramat Gan, Israel).
Background: When treating deep second degree and 3rd degree burns, one must
adjust dressing regimens frequently due to a change in the burn healing phase,
necessitating debridement, antimicrobial activity, control of secretions as well as a
2 Lohmann & Rauscher GmbH & Co. KG (Rengsdorf, Germany).
Aim: Dressings that adhere to the wound disrupt the wound bed and destroy new
healthy tissue on removal, resulting in a disturbed surface. We investigated the
punchmarking characteristics of different dressings in vitro by optical profilometry using a
tissue model.
proper microenvironment for re-epithelialization. A dressing regimen that provides a
Methods: Tissue was prepared from gelatine and powdered milk giving it a good solution for all stages is highly craved.
diffuse surface and certain compressive strength. Dressings A-F* were cut
smooth,
Patients and Methods: Between the years 2011 to 2012, 10 patients with ages ranging from 8 months to 62 years old (mean 26.8 years) with 2nd and 3rd degree burns ranging form 1.5% to 32% total body surface area were treated daily with an anti-microbial
alginate gel* until the burn wound healed secondarily or was cleaned and ready for skin corresponding to 4cm 2 and placed on the tissue weighted with a punch weight.
Experiments were performed for 24h, a) with plastic housing to avoid desiccation and b)
without plastic housing allowing drying/conglutination of dressings and tissue. T tissue
surface roughness was measured by a skin measurement system**.
grafting. Wound closure and infection rates were monitored as well as tolerance and
Results: All dressings significantly increased surface roughness during treatment.
adverse effects. Follow up ranged from 2 to 11 months (mean 6.9 months).
Nonadhesive dressings without a wound contact layer (B, D, F)* caused a slightly higher
Results: Average treatment period was 15 days. All wounds responded favorably to the treatment regimen, regardless of their specific wound healing phase. Two patients
required surgical debridement and skin grafting for a portion of their 3rd degree burns that did not heal secondarily. No adverse reactions were encountered.
surface roughness compared to wound dressings featuring a WCL (A, C, E)*. A slightly
lower effect on tissue surface was found for C* compared to D*. E* caused significantly
less surface distortion compared to F* (p