0
selected
-
1.
Bromelain-based enzymatic burn debridement: A systematic review of clinical studies on patient safety, efficacy and long-term outcomes
Shoham, Y., Gasteratos, K., Singer, A. J., Krieger, Y., Silberstein, E., Goverman, J.
International wound journal. 2023
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
In 2012 the European Medicines Agency approved a pineapple stem-derived Bromelain-based debridement concentrate of proteolytic enzymes (NexoBrid®, MediWound Ltd, Yavne, Israel) for adult deep burns. Over 10 000 patients have been successfully treated with NexoBrid® globally, including in the US. The aim of our study is to perform a systematic review of the current literature on Nexobrid® outcomes. We conducted a literature search in PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and other search engines (2013-2023). The online screening process was performed by two independent reviewers with the Covidence tool. The protocol was reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses, and it was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews of the National Institute for Health Research. We identified 103 relevant studies of which 34 were found eligible. The included studies report the positive effects of Nexobrid® on burn debridement, functional and cosmetic outcomes, scarring, and quality of life. Also, they validate the high patient satisfaction thanks to enhanced protocols of analgosedation and/or locoregional anaesthesia during Bromelain-based debridement. Two studies investigate potential risks (coagulopathy, burn wound infection) which concluded there is no strong evidence of these adverse events. NexoBrid® is a safe, selective, non-surgical eschar removal treatment modality. The benefits of Bromelain-based debridement are faster debridement and healing times, reduced operations, length of stay, cases of sepsis, blood transfusions, and prevention of compartment syndrome. Existing evidence suggests that the indications and the role of Bromelain-based debridement are expanding to cover "off-label" cases with significant benefits to the global healthcare economy.
-
2.
Efficiency of platelet-rich plasma in the management of burn wounds: A meta-analysis
Imam, M. S., Alotaibi, A. A. S., Alotaibi, N. O. M., Alosaimi, N. S., Alotaibi, S. G. M., Abdelrahim, M. E. A.
International wound journal. 2023
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
The meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficiency of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the management of burn wounds (BWs). Using dichotomous or contentious random- or fixed-effects models, the outcomes of this meta-analysis were examined and the odds ratio (OR) and the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed. Thirteen examinations from 2009 to 2023 were enrolled for the present meta-analysis, including 808 individuals with BWs. PRP had significantly shorter healing time (MD, -5.80; 95% CI, -7.73 to -3.88, p < 0.001), higher healing rate (OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 2.05-4.80, p < 0.001), higher healed area percent (MD, 12.67; 95% CI, 9.79-15.55, p < 0.001) and higher graft take area percent (MD, 4.39; 95% CI, 1.51-7.26, p = 0.003) compared with standard therapy in patients with BW. However, no significant difference was found between PRP and standard therapy in graft take ratio (OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.86-3.34, p = 0.13) and infection rate (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.20-1.47, p = 0.23) in patients with BW. The examined data revealed that PRP had a significantly shorter healing time, a higher healing rate, a higher healed area percent and a higher graft take area percent; however, no significant difference was found in graft take ratio or infection rate compared with standard therapy in patients with BW. Yet, attention should be paid to its values since all of the selected examinations had a low sample size and some comparisons had a low number of selected studies.
-
3.
Effect of platelet-rich plasma in treating patients with burn wounds: A meta-analysis
Lin, C., Xin, L., Xie, S.
International wound journal. 2023
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of burn wounds and to provide a scientific basis for clinical drug therapy. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang databases to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on PRP in treating burn wounds, with the control group being treated with conventional treatments and the intervention group being treated with PRP alone or combined with PRP on the basis of the control group. The search duration was each database's inception to September 2023. The literature was screened, data were extracted and quality was assessed by two independent researchers. Data analysis was performed using the Review Manager 5.4 software. Eighteen RCTs comprising 1463 patients were included in the analysis. The meta-analysis revealed that the application of PRP significantly improved the wound healing rate (standardised mean difference [SMD]: 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54-1.67, p < 0.001), shortened wound healing time (SMD: -1.69, 95% CIs: -2.21 to -1.17, p < 0.001) and reduced the incidence of adverse events (7.03% vs. 18.93%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.20-0.53, p < 0.001), and also significantly reduced patients' pain (SMD: -1.86, 95% CI: -2.47 to -1.25, p < 0.001) of burn patients when compared with the control group. This study showed that PRP is effective in repairing burn wounds, promoting wound healing, reducing the incidence of adverse events and reducing patient pain, making it worthy of clinical promotion and application.
-
4.
Vasoactive and/or inotropic drugs in initial resuscitation of burn injuries: A systematic review
Knappskog K, Andersen NG, Guttormsen AB, Onarheim H, Almeland SK, Beitland S
Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 2022
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND According to current guidelines initial burn resuscitation should be performed with fluids alone. The aims of the study were to review the frequency of use of vasoactive and/or inotropic drugs in initial burn resuscitation, and assess benefits and harms of adding such drugs to fluids. METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, UpToDate, and SveMed+ through 3 December 2021. The search included studies on critically ill burn patients receiving vasoactive and/or inotropic drugs in addition to fluids within 48 hours after burn injury. RESULTS The literature search identified 1058 unique publications that were screened for inclusion. After assessing 115 publications in full text, only two retrospective cohort studies were included. One study found that 16 out of 52 (31%) patients received vasopressor(s). Factors associated with vasopressor use were increasing age, burn depth and % total body surface area (TBSA) burnt. Another study observed that 20 out of 111 (18%) patients received vasopressor(s). Vasopressor use was associated with increasing age, Baux score and %TBSA burnt in addition to more frequent dialysis treatment and increased mortality. Study quality assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale was considered good in one study, but uncertain due to limited description of methods in the other. CONCLUSION This systematic review revealed that there is lack of evidence regarding benefits and harms of using vasoactive and/or inotropic drugs in addition to fluids during early resuscitation of patients with major burns.
-
5.
Efficacy and safety of blood purification in the treatment of deep burns: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Zhang G, Liu W, Li J, Wang D, Duan J, Luo H
Medicine. 2021;100(5):e23968
Abstract
INTRODUCTION This meta-analysis aimed to systematically review and evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies examining the efficacy and safety of blood purification in the treatment of patients with deep burns. METHODS The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases and relevant references were systematically searched for RCTs and cohort studies published until the end of September 2020 to investigate the potential of blood purification in improving the prognosis of severely burned patients. The primary outcome of this systematic review was overall patient mortality; secondary outcomes included the incidence of sepsis and infection prevention (vital signs and routine blood tests). RESULTS A total of 6 RCTs and 1 cohort study were included, with a total of 538 burn patients (274 patients who received blood purification and 264 control patients). Compared with patients who received conventional treatment, those treated with blood purification displayed significant 2-day reduction in mortality and sepsis with relative risks of 0.62 and 0.41, respectively (95% confidence intervals [CIs], 0.74-0.82 and 0.25-0.67, respectively; P < .05). In terms of vital signs and blood biochemistry, the respiratory rates and blood urea nitrogen levels of patients in the blood purification group 3 days post-treatment were significantly higher than those in the control group (randomized standard deviations (SMDs), 0.78 and 0.77, respectively; 95% CIs, 0.33-1.23 and 1.22-0.31, respectively; P < .05). However, there were no significant differences between groups on day 3 with regard to temperature (P = .32), heart rate (P = .26), white blood cell count (P = .54), or neutrophil count (P = .74), potentially owing to the small sample size or the relatively short intervention time. Heterogeneous differences existed between the groups with respect to blood urea nitrogen (SMD = -1.22; 95% CI, -2.16 to -0.40; P < .00001) and Cr (SMD = -3.13; 95% CI, -4.92 to -1.33; P < .00001) on day 7. No systematic adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS Blood purification treatment for deep burn patients can significantly reduce the mortality rate and the incidence of complications.
-
6.
Measuring coagulation in burns: an evidence-based systematic review
Marsden NJ, Van M, Dean S, Azzopardi EA, Hemington-Gorse S, EvansPA, Whitaker IS
Scars, Burns & Healing. 3:2059513117728201, 2017 Jan-Dec.. 2017;3:2059513117728201
Abstract
Introduction: Dynamic monitoring of coagulation is important to predict both haemorrhagic and thrombotic complications and to guide blood product administration. Reducing blood loss and tailoring blood product administration may improve patient outcome and reduce mortality associated with transfusion. The current literature lacks a systematic, critical appraisal of current best evidence on which clinical decisions may be based. Objectives: Establishing the role of different coagulation markers in burn patients, diagnosing coagulopathy, tailoring blood product administration and indicating prognosis. Methods: Literature during 2004-2017 from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, Medline and Embase was reviewed. Eligibility criteria included randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews, multi-/single-centre study and meta-analyses. Keywords searched were 'burns', 'blood coagulation disorders', 'rotem', 'blood coagulation' and 'thromboelastography'. The PRISMA flow system was used for stratification and the CASP framework for appraisal of the studies retrieved. Results: In total, 13 articles were included after inclusion/exclusion criteria had been applied to the initial 79 studies retrieved. Hypercoagulation increases in proportion to the severity of thermal injury. Whole blood testing, using thrombelastography (TEG) and rotation thromboelastometry (ROTEM), was superior to standard plasma based tests, including prothrombin time (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) at detecting burn-related coagulopathies. Conclusions: Routine laboratory markers such as PT/APTT are poor indicators of coagulation status in burns patients. Viscoelastic tests, such as TEG and ROTEM, are efficient, fast and have a potential use in the management of burn patients; however, strong evidence is lacking. This review highlights the need for more randomised controlled trials, to guide future practice.
-
7.
Albumin in burn shock resuscitation: a meta-analysis of controlled clinical studies
Navickis RJ, Greenhalgh DG, Wilkes MM
Journal of Burn Care Research. 2016;37((3):):e268-78
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Critical appraisal of outcomes after burn shock resuscitation with albumin has previously been restricted to small relatively old randomized trials, some with high risk of bias. Extensive recent data from nonrandomized studies assessing the use of albumin can potentially reduce bias and add precision. The objective of this meta-analysis was to determine the effect of burn shock resuscitation with albumin on mortality and morbidity in adult patients. Randomized and nonrandomized controlled clinical studies evaluating mortality and morbidity in adult patients receiving albumin for burn shock resuscitation were identified by multiple methods, including computer database searches and examination of journal contents and reference lists. Extracted data were quantitatively combined by random-effects meta-analysis. Four randomized and four nonrandomized studies with 688 total adult patients were included. Treatment effects did not differ significantly between the included randomized and nonrandomized studies. Albumin infusion during the first 24 hours showed no significant overall effect on mortality. However, significant statistical heterogeneity was present, which could be abolished by excluding two studies at high risk of bias. After those exclusions, albumin infusion was associated with reduced mortality. The pooled odds ratio was 0.34 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.19 to 0.58 (P < .001). Albumin administration was also accompanied by decreased occurrence of compartment syndrome (pooled odds ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.07–0.50; P < .001). This meta-analysis suggests that albumin can improve outcomes of burn shock resuscitation. However, the scope and quality of current evidence are limited, and additional trials are needed.