Comparison of wound healing and patient comfort in partial‐thickness burn wounds treated with SUPRATHEL and epicte^hydro wound dressings

Abstract

Among the available dressings for partial-thickness burn wound treatment, SUPRATHEL has shown good usability and effectiveness for wound healing and patient comfort and has been used in many burn centres in the last decade. Recently, bacterial nanocellulose (BNC) has become popular for the treatment of wounds, and many studies have demonstrated its efficacy. epicite hydro , consisting of BNC and 95% water, is a promising product and has recently been introduced in numerous burn centres. To date, no studies including direct comparisons to existing products like SUPRATHEL have been conducted. Therefore, we aimed to compare epicite hydro to SUPRATHEL in the treatment of partial-thickness burns. Twenty patients with partial-thickness burns affecting more than 0.5% of their total body surface area (TBSA) were enrolled in this prospective, unicentric, open, comparative, intra-individual clinical study. After debridement, the wounds were divided into two areas: one was treated with SUPRATHEL and the other with epicite hydro . Wound healing, infection, bleeding, exudation, dressing changes, and pain were documented. The quality of the scar tissue was assessed subjectively using the Patient and Observer Scar Scale. Wound healing in patients with a mean TBSA of 9.2% took 15 to 16 days for both treatments without dressing changes. All wounds showed minimal exudation, and patients reported decreased pain with the only significant difference between the two dressings on day 1. No infection or bleeding occurred in any of the wounds. Regarding scar evaluation, SUP-RATHEL and epicite hydro did not differ significantly. Both wound dressings were easy to use, were highly flexible, created a safe healing environment, had similar effects on pain reduction, and showed good cosmetic and functional Alexandra Schulz and Marc Daniels share equal authorship.

Management of Facial Second-Degree Burns with Nanocellulose-Based Dressing: A Case Series and Systematic Review

“…Among the different advantages, these dressings allow for adequate water-vapor exchange, provide a barrier against bacterial colonization, are enduring and extremely malleable, have an easy placement and removal process, and improve wound healing. 6 Particularly, BNC-based wound dressings have been shown to reduce the time for re- were obtained using PRP in conjunction with BNC-based wound dressings versus BNC alone, in this study we did not find a significant difference between therapeutic interventions for these outcomes using an alpha level of 0.05. We considered that the lack of significance may be in part due to the limited sample size, and that these associations could become statistically significant by improving the power of future studies.…”

“…This single-center prospective study was approved by the institutional review board (CC water. 6,7 Informed consent was obtained from all patients.…”

“…Six studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria after full-text assessment (Figure 3). 6,[23][24][25][26][27] We included three retrospective cohort studies (50%), one prospective cohort study (16.6%), one prospective case series (16.6%), and one preclinical study (16.6%) (Table 3). The OCEBM of five studies was IV and III for one study.…”

“…2,3 Nonetheless, the selection of the dressing should be individualized based on its healing effect, humidity, antiseptic potential, breathability, easiness to change, cost-effectiveness, and comfort of the patient. [4][5][6] Among the wide variety of available dressings, bacterial nanocellulose (BNC) -based wound dressings have shown to be practical and efficient in the treatment of partial-thickness burns. 6,7 The water content in the cellulose reduces the progression of the wound, intradermal temperature, and pain through evaporation.…”

Bacterial Cellulose—Adaptation of a Nature-Identical Material to the Needs of Advanced Chronic Wound Care

“…The hydroactive BC wound dressing epicite hydro (BC_A) has already been proven to perform very well in the treatment of burn wounds [52][53][54][55]. In order to investigate its clinical performance in chronic wound treatment, a PMCF observation study with 44 patients suffering from venous leg ulcers, mixed leg ulcers, and diabetic foot syndrome was carried out.…”