Outcomes in Pediatric Burn Patients With Additional Trauma-Related Injuries.

The addition of trauma to burn injuries may result in higher morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of pediatric patients with a combination of burn and trauma injuries, and included all pediatric Burn only, Trauma only, and combined Burn-Trauma patients admitted between 2011 and 2020. Mean length of stay, ICU length of stay, and ventilator days were highest for the Burn-Trauma group. The odds of mortality were almost 13 times higher for the Burn-Trauma group when compared to the Burn only group (P = .1299). After using inverse probability of treatment weighting, the odds of mortality were almost 10 times higher for the Burn-Trauma group in comparison to the Burn only group (P < .0066). Thus, the addition of trauma to burn injuries was associated with increased odds of mortality, as well as longer ICU and overall hospital length of stay in this patient population.

COVID-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis in a 4-year-old female: a case report and literature review.

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are conditions characterized by an immune-mediated skin reaction that results in blistering and epidermal detachment. Most cases are caused by drug hypersensitivity; however, recently there have been many publications documenting the association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and SJS/TEN. Our objective is to explore a case of a 4-year-old female who presented with a papular rash on her thighs that progressively worsened and spread to her face, trunk, and genital area. The patient tested positive for COVID-19. She required treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and IV methylprednisolone, but eventually made a full recovery. This case underscores the need for awareness of the wide spectrum of dermatologic presentations in COVID-19 patients.

Pooled safety analysis of STRATA2011 and STRATA2016 clinical trials evaluating the use of StrataGraft® in patients with deep partial-thickness thermal burns.

OBJECTIVE: This analysis includes pooled safety data from 2 clinical trials (NCT01437852; NCT03005106) that evaluated the safety and efficacy of StrataGraft in patients with deep partial-thickness (DPT) burns. METHODS: The study enrolled 101 adult patients with thermal burns covering 3-49% of total body surface area. Patients were followed for up to 1 year. The pooled safety events included: adverse events (AEs), adverse reactions (ARs), serious AEs (SAEs), discontinuation, and deaths; immunological responses (reactivity to panel reactive antibodies [PRA] and human leukocyte antigen [HLA] class 1 alleles); and persistence of allogeneic DNA from StrataGraft. RESULTS: Eighty-seven (86.1%) patients experienced 397 AEs. Thirty patients (29.7%) experienced ARs; 16 patients (15.8%) experienced SAEs. The most frequent AEs were pruritus (n = 31; 30.7%), and blister, hypertension, and hypertrophic scar (n = 11 each; 10.9%); the most common AR was pruritus (n = 13; 12.9%). One patient discontinued the study; 2 patients experienced SAEs (unrelated to StrataGraft) leading to death. PRA and HLA allele reactivity was ≤ 25% at Month 3, with no persistent allogeneic DNA from StrataGraft. CONCLUSIONS: StrataGraft was well tolerated by patients, with a safety profile similar to autograft. StrataGraft may offer a safe alternative to autograft for DPT burns.

Porcine Xenograft and Epidermal Fully Synthetic Skin Substitutes in the Treatment of Partial-Thickness Burns: A Literature Review.

Background and Objectives: Porcine xenografts have been used successfully in partial thickness burn treatment for many years. Their disappearance from the market led to the search for effective and efficient alternatives. In this article, we examine the synthetic epidermal skin substitute Suprathel® as a substitute in the treatment of partial thickness burns. Materials and Methods: A systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines has been performed. Sixteen Suprathel® and 12 porcine xenograft studies could be included. Advantages and disadvantages between the treatments and the studies' primary endpoints have been investigated qualitatively and quantitatively. Results: Although Suprathel had a nearly six times larger TBSA in their studies (p < 0.001), it showed a significantly lower necessity for skin grafts (p < 0.001), and we found a significantly lower infection rate (p < 0.001) than in Porcine Xenografts. Nonetheless, no significant differences in the healing time (p = 0.67) and the number of dressing changes until complete wound healing (p = 0.139) could be found. Both products reduced pain to various degrees with the impression of a better performance of Suprathel® on a qualitative level. Porcine xenograft was not recommended for donor sites or coverage of sheet-transplanted keratinocytes, while Suprathel® was used successfully in both indications. Conclusion: The investigated parameters indicate that Suprathel® to be an effective replacement for porcine xenografts with even lower subsequent treatment rates. Suprathel® appears to be usable in an extended range of indications compared to porcine xenograft. Data heterogeneity limited conclusions from the results.

The effect of neighborhood Area Deprivation Index on residential burn injury severity.

INTRODUCTION: Residential fires account for the majority of burn-related injuries and fatalities. Established risk factors for burn injury include male gender, racial minority, children and elderly individuals, poverty, and substandard housing characteristics. In North Carolina, the rate of residential fire injuries and deaths is higher than the national average. Therefore, we sought to describe residential fire hospitalizations at a large regional burn center and describe the neighborhoods in which they live. We hypothesized that patients living in areas with higher Area Deprivation Index (ADI) are more likely to have major residential burns. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of burn admissions from January 2002 to December 2015. We dichotomized patients into two cohorts: residential and non-residential burns and performed a bivariate analysis. Multivariate Poisson regression models were utilized to determine if ADI was associated with inhalation injury and ≥20% total body surface area burn. RESULTS: Of the 10,506 patients presented during the study period. Of these, 10,016 (95.3%) patients resided in North Carolina, and 7894 (78.8%) had a residential burn. Of the overall cohort, 6.0% (n=458) of patients had ≥20% TBSA burns and 6.4% (n=506) had inhalation injury. The majority of patients were in the highest (most disadvantaged) ADI quartile (n=3050, 39.5%), and only 6.8% of patients (n=525) were in the lowest (least disadvantaged) ADI quartile. In the Poisson multivariate regressions to determine if the ADI was associated with severe burns, patients in the highest ADI quartile had an increased relative risk of ≥20% TBSA burn (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.02-1.68) and inhalation injury (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.09-1.76) when compared to patients in the second-lowest ADI quartile when controlled for pertinent covariates. CONCLUSION: Residential structure fires represent the major source of burns and fatalities. People who reside in the highest ADI quartile are more like to present with higher burn injury severity in terms of burn size and the presence of inhalation injury. The use of the ADI to target neighborhoods for burn prevention is imperative.

Bias in alcohol and drug screening in adult burn patients.

Alcohol and illicit drug use are common among burn-injured patients. Urine toxicology and alcohol screens are a part of our admission order sets and automatically ordered for all adult patients. Our objective was to determine the impact of bias in screening compliance and compare those results to patients who test positive. All adult patients admitted between January 1st, 2014 and December 31st, 2018 were eligible for inclusion. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify potential predictors for compliance in obtaining samples for screens, and patient characteristics associated with testing positive. Four thousand nine hundred ninety-eight patients were included in the study. The biggest predictors for compliance in obtaining samples for screens were inhalation injury, intensive care unit stay, length of stay, burn size, and current smoking status. No differences in compliance with screens were seen across age, race, or ethnicity. Current smokers and patients with a history of major psychiatric illness were more likely to test positive for alcohol and illicit drugs. Non-Hispanic Black patients were more likely to test positive for illicit drugs. Male sex and pre-existing psychiatric conditions were significant predictors for compliance for alcohol screens, and, positive tests. Implicit bias based on age, race, or ethnicity played no predictive role in compliance for either screen, however, non-Hispanic Blacks were more likely to test positive for illicit drugs. More studies are needed to understand the effect of selection bias related to sample collection, and the significance of positive test results.

COVID-19 related admissions to a regional burn center: The impact of shelter-in-place mandate.

The ramifications from the 2019 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the novel corona virus will be felt globally for years to come. Mandates to shelter-in-place were called in nearly every state to limit viral exposure. The impact of the mandate on acute burn admissions was unknown. Our objective was to assess the impact of a shelter-in-place order on acute burn admissions at our burn center. All patients admitted to the burn center with burn injuries- including inhalation injury only- and desquamating skin disorders between March 10th to May 22nd, 2020 were eligible for inclusion. We compared all burn center admissions to a month-matched historical cohort from 2019, and summertime admissions for the last five years. Statistical significance was accepted as p < 0.05. There was a 9% increase in pediatric admissions after the shelter-in-place order. Compared to the 2019 cohort, there was a 28% increase in admissions of school aged children in 2020. This was not statistically significant. While the purpose of the "shelter-in-place" mandate was to reduce viral transmission of COVID-19, it consequently led to an increased percentage of admissions of school age children- comparable to our summertime numbers. More outreach and education are needed to provide safe resources for families during this pandemic.

An open-label, prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter, phase 1b study of StrataGraft skin tissue versus autografting in patients with deep partial-thickness thermal burns.

OBJECTIVE: This open-label, controlled, randomized study assessed the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of StrataGraft tissue compared to autograft in the treatment of deep partial-thickness (DPT) burns. METHODS: Thirty subjects with DPT thermal burns (3%-43% total body surface area) were treated with StrataGraft tissue as follows: cohort 1, ≤220 cm2 refrigerated tissue; cohort 2, ≤440 cm2 refrigerated tissue; and cohort 3, ≤440 cm2 cryopreserved tissue. On each subject, two comparable areas of DPT burn were randomized to receive StrataGraft tissue or autograft. Coprimary end points were the percent area of the StrataGraft tissue treatment site undergoing salvage autografting by Day 28 and wound closure of treatment sites by 3 months. RESULTS: By Day 28, no StrataGraft tissue treatment sites underwent autografting. By 3 months, 93% and 100% of the StrataGraft tissue and autograft treatment sites achieved complete wound closure, respectively. No significant differences in observer total and overall opinion POSAS scores between StrataGraft tissue and autograft treatment sites were observed at any timepoint. The most common adverse event was pruritus (17%). CONCLUSIONS: StrataGraft tissue treatment of DPT thermal burns reduced the need for autograft, resulted in wound closure and treatment-site cosmesis comparable to that of autograft, and was well tolerated.

Rehabilitation of Burn Injuries: An Update.

A major burn is a severe injury with a global impact. Our system of medical evacuation has led to the survival of many severely injured service members. Burn rehabilitation is a complex and dynamic process and will not be linear. Recovery requires a comprehensive, interdisciplinary team-based approach, individually designed to maximize function, minimize disability, promote self-acceptance, and facilitate survivor and family reintegration into the community.

Restrictive Transfusion Strategy Is More Effective in Massive Burns: Results of the TRIBE Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Studies suggest that a restrictive transfusion strategy is safe in burns, yet the efficacy of a restrictive transfusion policy in massive burn injury is uncertain. Our objective: compare outcomes between massive burn (≥60% total body surface area (TBSA) burn) and major (20-59% TBSA) burn using a restrictive or a liberal blood transfusion strategy. METHODS: Patients with burns ≥20% were block randomized by age and TBSA to a restrictive (transfuse hemoglobin <7 g/dL) or liberal (transfuse hemoglobin <10 g/dL) strategy throughout hospitalization. Data collected included demographics, infections, transfusions, and outcomes. RESULTS: Three hundred and forty-five patients received 7,054 units blood, 2,886 in massive and 4,168 in restrictive. Patients were similar in age, TBSA, and inhalation injury. The restrictive group received less blood (45.57 ± 47.63 vs. 77.16 ± 55.0, p < 0.03 massive; 11.0 ± 16.70 vs. 16.78 ± 17.39, p < 0.001) major). In massive burn, the restrictive group had fewer ventilator days (p < 0.05). Median ICU days and LOS were lower in the restrictive group; wound healing, mortality, and infection did not differ. No significant outcome differences occurred in the major (20-59%) group (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A restrictive transfusion strategy may be beneficial in massive burns in reducing ventilator days, ICU days and blood utilization, but does not decrease infection, mortality, hospital LOS or wound healing.

Demonstration of the safety and effectiveness of the RECELL® System combined with split-thickness meshed autografts for the reduction of donor skin to treat mixed-depth burn injuries.

INTRODUCTION: Split-thickness skin grafts (STSG) are the standard of care (SOC) for burns undergoing autografting but are associated with donor skin site morbidity and limited by the availability of uninjured skin. The RECELL® Autologous Cell Harvesting Device (RECELL® System, or RECELL) was developed for point-of-care preparation and application of a suspension of non-cultured, disaggregated, autologous skin cells, using 1cm2 of the patient's skin to treat up to 80cm2 of excised burn. METHODS: A multi-center, prospective, within-subject controlled, randomized, clinical trial was conducted with 30 subjects to evaluate RECELL in combination with a more widely meshed STSG than a pre-defined SOC meshed STSG (RECELL treatment) for the treatment of mixed-depth burns, including full-thickness. Treatment areas were randomized to receive standard meshed STSG (Control treatment) or RECELL treatment, such that each subject had 1 Control and 1 RECELL treatment area. Effectiveness measures were assessed and included complete wound closure, donor skin use, subject satisfaction, and scarring outcomes out to one year following treatment. RESULTS: At 8 weeks, 85% of the Control-treated wounds were healed compared with 92% of the RECELL-treated wounds, establishing the non-inferiority of RECELL treatment for wound healing. Control-treated and RECELL-treated wounds were similar in mean size; however, mean donor skin use was significantly reduced by 32% with the use of RECELL (p<0.001), establishing the superiority of RECELL treatment for reducing donor skin requirements. Secondary effectiveness and safety outcomes were similar between the treatments. CONCLUSIONS: In combination with widely meshed STSG, RECELL is a safe and effective point-of-care treatment for mixed-depth burns without confluent dermis, achieving short- and long-term healing comparable to standard STSG, while significantly decreasing donor skin use.

The Effects of Storage Age of Blood in Massively Transfused Burn Patients: A Secondary Analysis of the Randomized Transfusion Requirement in Burn Care Evaluation Study.

OBJECTIVES: Major trials examining storage age of blood transfused to critically ill patients administered relatively few blood transfusions. We sought to determine if the storage age of blood affects outcomes when very large amounts of blood are transfused. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of the multicenter randomized Transfusion Requirement in Burn Care Evaluation study which compared restrictive and liberal transfusion strategies. SETTING: Eighteen tertiary-care burn centers. PATIENTS: Transfusion Requirement in Burn Care Evaluation evaluated 345 adults with burns greater than or equal to 20% of the body surface area. We included only the 303 patients that received blood transfusions. INTERVENTIONS: The storage ages of all transfused red cell units were collected during Transfusion Requirement in Burn Care Evaluation. A priori measures of storage age were the the mean storage age of all transfused blood and the proportion of all transfused blood considered very old (stored ≥ 35 d). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the severity of multiple organ dysfunction. Secondary outcomes included time to wound healing, the duration of mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality. There were 6,786 red cell transfusions with a mean (± SD) storage age of 25.6 ± 10.2 days. Participants received a mean of 23.4 ± 31.2 blood transfusions (range, 1-219) and a mean of 5.3 ± 10.7 units of very old blood. Neither mean storage age nor proportion of very old blood had any influence on multiple organ dysfunction severity, time to wound healing, or mortality. Duration of ventilation was significantly predicted by both mean blood storage age and the proportion of very old blood, but this was of questionable clinical relevance given extreme variability in duration of ventilation (adjusted r ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Despite massive blood transfusion, including very old blood, the duration of red cell storage did not influence outcome in burn patients. Provision of the oldest blood first by Blood Banks is rational, even for massive transfusion.

Burn Casualty Care in the Deployed Setting.

Management of wartime burn casualties can be very challenging. Burns frequently occur in the setting of other blunt and penetrating injuries. This clinical practice guideline provides a manual for burn injury assessment, resuscitation, wound care, and specific scenarios including chemical and electrical injuries in the deployed or austere setting. The clinical practice guideline also reviews considerations for the definitive care of local national patients, including pediatric patients, who are unable to be evacuated from theater. Medical providers are encouraged to contact the US Army Institute of Surgical Research (USAISR) Burn Center when caring for a burn casualty in the deployed setting.

A Comparative Study of the ReCell® Device and Autologous Spit-Thickness Meshed Skin Graft in the Treatment of Acute Burn Injuries.

Early excision and autografting are standard care for deeper burns. However, donor sites are a source of significant morbidity. To address this, the ReCell® Autologous Cell Harvesting Device (ReCell) was designed for use at the point-of-care to prepare a noncultured, autologous skin cell suspension (ASCS) capable of epidermal regeneration using minimal donor skin. A prospective study was conducted to evaluate the clinical performance of ReCell vs meshed split-thickness skin grafts (STSG, Control) for the treatment of deep partial-thickness burns. Effectiveness measures were assessed to 1 year for both ASCS and Control treatment sites and donor sites, including the incidence of healing, scarring, and pain. At 4 weeks, 98% of the ASCS-treated sites were healed compared with 100% of the Controls. Pain and assessments of scarring at the treatment sites were reported to be similar between groups. Significant differences were observed between ReCell and Control donor sites. The mean ReCell donor area was approximately 40 times smaller than that of the Control (P < .0001), and after 1 week, significantly more ReCell donor sites were healed than Controls (P = .04). Over the first 16 weeks, patients reported significantly less pain at the ReCell donor sites compared with Controls (P ≤ .05 at each time point). Long-term patients reported higher satisfaction with ReCell donor site outcomes compared with the Controls. This study provides evidence that the treatment of deep partial-thickness burns with ASCS results in comparable healing, with significantly reduced donor site size and pain and improved appearance relative to STSG.

Transfusion Requirement in Burn Care Evaluation (TRIBE): A Multicenter Randomized Prospective Trial of Blood Transfusion in Major Burn Injury.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to compare outcomes of a restrictive to a liberal red cell transfusion strategy in 20% or more total body surface area (TBSA) burn patients. We hypothesized that the restrictive group would have less blood stream infection (BSI), organ dysfunction, and mortality. BACKGROUND: Patients with major burns have major (>1 blood volume) transfusion requirements. Studies suggest that a restrictive blood transfusion strategy is equivalent to a liberal strategy. However, major burn injury is precluded from these studies. The optimal transfusion strategy in major burn injury is thus needed but remains unknown. METHODS: This prospective randomized multicenter trial block randomized patients to a restrictive (hemoglobin 7-8 g/dL) or liberal (hemoglobin 10-11 g/dL) transfusion strategy throughout hospitalization. Data collected included demographics, infections, transfusions, and outcomes. RESULTS: Eighteen burn centers enrolled 345 patients with 20% or more TBSA burn similar in age, TBSA burn, and inhalation injury. A total of 7054 units blood were transfused. The restrictive group received fewer blood transfusions: mean 20.3 ±â€Š32.7 units, median = 8 (interquartile range: 3, 24) versus mean 31.8 ±â€Š44.3 units, median = 16 (interquartile range: 7, 40) in the liberal group (P < 0.0001, Wilcoxon rank sum). BSI incidence, organ dysfunction, ventilator days, and time to wound healing (P > 0.05) were similar. In addition, there was no 30-day mortality difference: 9.5% restrictive versus 8.5% liberal (P = 0.892, χ test). CONCLUSIONS: A restrictive transfusion strategy halved blood product utilization. Although the restrictive strategy did not decrease BSI, mortality, or organ dysfunction in major burn injury, these outcomes were no worse than the liberal strategy (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01079247).

The Care of Thermally Injured Patients in Operational, Austere, and Mass Casualty Situations.

Burn injury affects a half million people in the United States annually. The severe thermal injury can have long-term debilitating effects. The management of burn patients in austere and operational environments is more complex. Mass casualty incidents can result in a large number of patients with multiple traumatic injuries, which often include burn injury. Appropriate triage of casualties is essential. Severely burned patients should be evacuated to a burn center if possible. Airway management and fluid resuscitation of burn patients present unique challenges. Supplies, resources, and expertise to maintain a definitive airway may not be readily available. Airway adjuncts can be helpful but judicious use of resources is warranted in the austere setting. Traditional resuscitation of severe thermal injury is not practical in the austere environment. Oral resuscitation and in rare cases rectal hydration may be utilized until the patient can be transported to a medical facility. Much has been learned about the management of burn and polytraumatized patients after mass casualty incidents such as the September 11, 2001 terror attacks and the Pope Air Force Base disaster. A well-coordinated emergency preparedness plan is essential. The care of burn patients in austere, operational, and mass casualty situations can tax resources and manpower. The care of these patients will require creativity and ingenuity. Burn patients can be difficult to manage under normal circumstances but the care of these patients under the above situations complicates the management severalfold.

Thermal injury patterns associated with electronic cigarettes.

E-cigarettes are typically lithium-ion battery-operated devices that simulate smoking by heating a nicotine-solution into a vapor that the user inhales. E-cigarette use is becoming rapidly popular as an alternative to traditional cigarette smoking. This report describes an emerging problem associated with e-cigarettes, consisting of 10 thermally injured patients seen at a single burn center over a 2-year period from 2014 to 2016. Our cohort was comprised mainly of young adults who sustained mixed partial and full thickness burns as a result of e-cigarette-related explosions. In many documented scenarios, a malfunctioning or over-heated battery is the cause. Our data support the need for increased awareness among healthcare providers and the general public of the potential harms of e-cigarette use, modification, storage, and charging.