Background: Antioxidant therapies, such as ascorbic acid may have an important role during the acute phase of burn management. However, there are mixed results on the most effective dose and method of administration of ascorbic acid in burn patients. In this study, we compared the efficacy of intravenously and orally administered ascorbic acid in second-degree burns greater than 20% total-body-surface-area. Materials and methods: The hospital burn database was used to obtain data on all patients with second-degree or deeper burns of 20% total-body-surface-area or greater. Fourteen patients were selected at random to receive a scheduled dose of 1250 mg intravenous ascorbic acid every 6 h for 72 h. This was considered the high-dose group. During same period, 40 patients received scheduled 500 mg oral ascorbic acid every 6 h for 72 h and this was considered the low-dose group. We gathered sociodemographic and clinical variables associated with ascorbic acid dosing. Results: In our study, statistically significant variables were fluid requirements (p<0.001), hospital stay (p=0.011), length of time intubated on ventilator (p<0.001), colloids used (p=0.002), and total procedures required (p=0.014). Despite higher modified Baux predicted mortality in the high-dose group (10 patients vs. 24 patients, p=0.026) there was no noted significant association in days until the first infection and mortality rate (p=0.451 and 0.326, respectively). Conclusions: The calculated modified Baux predicted a higher mortality rate with the higher dosing group, yet this study did not find a mortality difference between the groups. We speculate that high-dose intravenous ascorbic acid may have protective effects in burn resuscitation. This finding may support some previous studies that found that high-dose ascorbic acid may improve clinical outcomes.
Introduction While vitamin C is a regular part of burn management, there is no consensus on the most effective dose for a reduction in mortality, fluid resuscitation requirement, and other various clinical benefits. In this study, we aim to evaluate the potential protective effects of a higher dose of intravenous vitamin C in burn patients with greater than 40% total body surface area (TBSA) as compared to the effects on low dose oral vitamin C with lower TBSA burns. Methods A total of 54 subjects were retrospectively reviewed with burns greater than 20% TBSA from January 2018 to 2021. In our burn unit, patients with smaller burns were given 2,500 mg PO vitamin C and larger TBSA burns were given 15,000 mg IV vitamin C within 72 hours. During this period, we found 40 patients in the low dose group and 14 patients in the higher dose group. Demographics, length of stay, length on a ventilator, fluid requirements, number of procedures, days to the first infection, and mortality were compared using the Chi-square test. Results We found that there was a significant difference in the degree of burn on admission and reassessment between the dosing groups (30% vs. 48%, p = 0.006; 32% vs. 57%, p < 0.001). Overall fluid requirements for the first three days (9 liters vs. 25 liters, p < 0.001), length of stay (13 days vs. 38 days, p = 0.011), length on a ventilator (2 days vs. 13 days, p < 0.001), and total procedures required (1 vs. 5, p = 0.014) were also significantly higher in the group given the IV dose. No significant difference in other outcomes such as days until first infection and mortality rate were found, (p=0.451 and 0.326, respectively). Conclusions Parameters that were statistically significant were consistent with the higher burn TBSA. Despite the group with larger surface area burns to require much higher fluid requirements (25 liters vs. 9 liters in 72 hours), high dose IV vitamin C may have been protective since the outcomes of days until first infection and mortality rate had no significant difference compared to the group with the smaller TBSA burn which should have predictably better outcomes. This clinical study supports other studies that high dose vitamin C may improve outcomes from a reduction in capillary leak to mortality but an adequately powered randomized prospective approach is needed to better define the benefits as well as dosing.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.