Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMJ Open ; 13(9): e058006, 2023 09 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37748846

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Despite of recent advancement in the burns wound management, burn wound infection (BWI) is still one of the major cause of burns mortality. Patients who survive their burns injury still suffers from BWI related complication like delayed wound healing and poor scarring. BWI has been treated by application of topical antimicrobial agents or systemic antibiotics. Due to the global risk of developing systemic antibiotics resistance, medical research focuses on identifying single topical agent which has effective antimicrobial activity, easily available and cost effective. One such agent is acetic acid (AA). AA has been used as a topical antibacterial agent for the treatment of burns wounds for many years and has shown to have activity against gram-negative organisms including Pseudomonas aeruginosa. So far there has been no consensus on optimal concentration that has effective antimicrobial activity, frequency of application, duration of treatment and most importantly good patient's tolerability. A randomised control study is required to answer all these questions. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of 0.5% and 2% of AA when applied to colonised burns wounds for 3 days after admittance to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a double-blinded, prospective, randomised, controlled, single-centre trial. Patients will be screened for eligibility in the inpatient area and those who are found to be eligible will be randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: group 1: 0.5% AA (10 patients); group 2: 2% AA (10 patients); total number: 20 patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome: Efficacy will be assessed by measuring the bacterial load from microbiology wound swabs for three consecutive days.Secondary outcomes: (1) The assessment of antimicrobial activity of AA and the minimum inhibitory concentrations. (2) Patient's tolerance by assessing Visual Analogue Scale pain score. (3) Time to 95% wound healing of treatment area. (4) Patient's perceived treatment allocation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: AceticA trial protocol was approved by the National Research Ethics Service (West Midlands-Edgbaston Research Ethics Committee; 17/WM/0407; IRAS 234132). This article refers to protocol version 5.0 dated 6 July 2020. The analysed results will be presented at national and international conferences related to management of burn patients. The generated articles based on the trial results will be submitted to peer review journals for publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11636684.


Assuntos
Ácido Acético , Queimaduras , Humanos , Ácido Acético/uso terapêutico , Projetos Piloto , Estudos Prospectivos , Queimaduras/tratamento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
2.
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg ; 75(8): 2616-2624, 2022 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35599217

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Major thermal injury induces a complex pathophysiological state characterized by burn shock and hypercatabolism. Steroids are used to modulate these post-injury responses. However, the effects of steroids on acute post-burn outcomes remain unclear. METHODS: In this study of 52 thermally injured adult patients (median total burn surface area 42%, 33 males and 19 females), the effects of corticosteroid and oxandrolone on mortality, multi-organ failure (MOF), and sepsis were assessed individually. Clinical data were collected at days 1, 3, 7, and 14 post-injury. RESULTS: Twenty-two (42%) and 34 (65%) burns patients received corticosteroids and oxandrolone within the same cohort, respectively. Following separate analysis for each steroid, corticosteroid use was associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 3.25, 95% CI: 1.32-8•00), MOF (OR 2.36, 95% CI: 1.00-1.55), and sepsis (OR 5.95, 95% CI: 2.53-14.00). Days alive (HR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.18-0.60) and sepsis-free days (HR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.37-0.80) were lower among corticosteroid-treated patients. Oxandrolone use was associated with reduced odds of 28-day mortality (OR 0.11, 95% CI: 0.04-0.30), in-hospital mortality (OR 0.19, 95% CI: 0.08-0.43), and sepsis (OR 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.69). Days alive, at 28 days (HR 6.42, 95% CI: 2.77-14.9) and in-hospital (HR 3.30, 95% CI: 1.93-5.63), were higher among the oxandrolone-treated group. However, oxandrolone was associated with increased MOF odds (OR 7.90, 95% CI: 2.89-21.60) and reduced MOF-free days (HR 0.23, 95% CI: 0.11-0.50). CONCLUSION: Steroid therapies following major thermal injury may significantly affect patient prognosis. Oxandrolone was associated with better outcomes except for MOF. Adverse effects of corticosteroids and oxandrolone should be considered when managing burn patients.


Assuntos
Anabolizantes , Sepse , Adulto , Anabolizantes/efeitos adversos , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Masculino , Oxandrolona/farmacologia , Oxandrolona/uso terapêutico , Sepse/tratamento farmacológico
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA