ASSESSMENT OF THE THERAPEUTIC EFFICACY OF AN ADVANCED PHYSICAL ANTIMICROBIAL DRESSING IN THE MANAGEMENT OF PARTIAL-THICKNESS BURNS
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Partial-thickness burns are common, painful, prone to infection, and may lead to scarring. Traditional dressings have limitations in healing rate, infection control, and pain management. An advanced dressing utilizing Sorbact technology with a DACC (Dialkylcarbamoyl Chloride) mesh offers non-antibiotic antimicrobial action and supports tissue regeneration. This study evaluates its efficacy in partial-thickness burns at the Vietnam National Burns Hospital.
Subjects and Methods: A prospective, descriptive, longitudinal study was conducted on 30 patients (aged 18–65 years) with partial-thickness burns (degree II and superficial degree III, total burn surface area ≤ 50%) admitted to the Intensive Care Unit from January 2025 to March 2025. The Sorbact-technology dressing (Cutimed Sorbact) was applied, changed every two days. Pain was assessed using VAS; wound bacterial samples were collected at admission (N1), day 3 (N3), day 7 (N7), and day 14 (N14). Data were analyzed with Stata 17.0; p < 0.05 was considered significant.
Results: Bacterial load increased from 0.48 ± 0.12 × 10³ CFU/cm² (N1) to 38.2 ± 15.5 × 10³ CFU/cm² (N3), then decreased sharply to 2.3 ± 0.8 × 10³ CFU/cm² (N7) and 1.5 ± 0.2 × 10³ CFU/cm² (N14) (p < 0.001 for all paired comparisons). The proportion of patients with no bacterial growth increased from 53.3% (N7) to 70% (N14) (p < 0.05). Mean epithelialization time was 11.8 ± 3.2 days, with 4.5 ± 1.8 dressing changes. Mean VAS pain score decreased from 7.1 ± 1.2 (N1) to 1.8 ± 0.8 (N14) (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: The advanced physical antimicrobial dressing effectively controls infection, promotes wound healing, and reduces pain in partial-thickness burns. It may be a potential treatment option.
Keywords
Partial-thickness burns, physical antimicrobial, DACC, wound healing
Article Details
References
2. Nguyễn Như Lâm, Hồ Thị Xuân Hương, Chu Anh Tuấn (2017). Mass burn injuries: an analysis of characteristics and outcomes in a developing country. Annals of Burns and Fire Disasters, 30(3), 210-213.
3. Wasiak J., Cleland H., Campbell F., et al. (2013). Dressings for superficial and partial thickness burns. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013(3). Art. No.: CD002106.
4. Cutting K.F., Butcher M. (2011). DACC antimicrobial technology: a new paradigm in bioburden management. Journal of Wound Care, 20(Sup3), 1-19.
5. Peck M.D. (2012). Epidemiology of burns throughout the World. Part II: intentional burns in adults. Burns, 38(5), 630-637.
6. Church D., Elsayed S., Reid O., et al. (2006). Burn Wound Infections. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 19(2), 403-434.
7. Palmieri T.L., Greenhalgh D.G. (2002). Topical Treatment of Pediatric Patients with Burns: A Practical Guide. American Journal of Clinical Dermatology, 3(8), 529-534.
8. Atiyeh B.S., Costagliola M., Hayek S.N., et al. (2007). Effect of silver on burn wound infection control and healing: review of the literature. Burns, 33(2), 139-148.
9. Barret J.P., Dziewulski P., Ramzy P.I., et al. (2000). Biobrane versus 1% silver sulfadiazine in second-degree pediatric burns. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 105(1), 62-65.
10. Caruso D.M., Foster K.N., Blome-Eberwein S.A., et al. (2006). Randomized clinical study of Hydrofiber dressing with silver or silver sulfadiazine in the management of partial-thickness burns. Journal of Burn Care & Research, 27(3), 298-309.
11. Mosti G., Magliaro A., Mattaliano V., et al. (2015). Comparative study of two antimicrobial dressings in infected leg ulcers: a pilot study. Journal of Wound Care, 24(3), 121-127.