Pressure-garment therapy for preventing hypertrophic scarring after burn injury.

BACKGROUND: Burn damage to skin often results in scarring; however in some individuals the failure of normal wound-healing processes results in excessive scar tissue formation, termed 'hypertrophic scarring'. The most commonly used method for the prevention and treatment of hypertrophic scarring is pressure-garment therapy (PGT). PGT is considered standard care globally; however, there is continued uncertainty around its effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of pressure-garment therapy for the prevention of hypertrophic scarring after burn injury. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and two trials registers on 8 June 2023 with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PGT (alone or in combination with other scar-management therapies) with scar management therapies not including PGT, or comparing different PGT pressures or different types of PGT. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion using predetermined inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 studies in this review (1179 participants), 14 of which (1057 participants) presented useable data. The sample size of included studies ranged from 17 to 159 participants. Most studies included both adults and children. Eight studies compared a pressure garment (with or without another scar management therapy) with scar management therapy alone, five studies compared the same pressure garment at a higher pressure versus a lower pressure, and two studies compared two different types of pressure garments. Studies used a variety of pressure garments (e.g. in-house manufactured or a commercial brand). Types of scar management therapies included were lanolin massage, topical silicone gel, silicone sheet/dressing, and heparin sodium ointment. Meta-analysis was not possible as there was significant clinical and methodological heterogeneity between studies. Main outcome measures were scar improvement assessed using the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) or the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) (or both), pain, pruritus, quality of life, adverse events, and adherence to therapy. Studies additionally reported a further 14 outcomes, mostly individual scar parameters, some of which contributed to global scores on the VSS or POSAS. The amount of evidence for each individual outcome was limited. Most studies had a short follow-up, which may have affected results as the full effect of any therapy on scar healing may not be seen until around 18 months. PGT versus no treatment/lanolin We included five studies (378 participants). The evidence is very uncertain on whether PGT improves scars as assessed by the VSS compared with no treatment/lanolin. The evidence is also very uncertain for pain, pruritus, adverse events, and adherence. No study used the POSAS or assessed quality of life. One additional study (122 participants) did not report useable data. PGT versus silicone We included three studies (359 participants). The evidence is very uncertain on the effect of PGT compared with silicone, as assessed by the VSS and POSAS. The evidence is also very uncertain for pain, pruritus, quality of life, adverse events, adherence, and other scar parameters. It is possible that silicone may result in fewer adverse events or better adherence compared with PGT but this was also based on very low-certainty evidence. PGT plus silicone versus no treatment/lanolin We included two studies (200 participants). The evidence is very uncertain on whether PGT plus silicone improves scars as assessed by the VSS compared with no treatment/lanolin. The evidence is also very uncertain for pain, pruritus, and adverse events. No study used the POSAS or assessed quality of life or adherence. PGT plus silicone versus silicone We included three studies (359 participants). The evidence is very uncertain on the effect of PGT plus silicone compared with silicone, as assessed by the VSS and POSAS. The evidence is also very uncertain for pain, pruritus, quality of life, adverse events, and adherence. PGT plus scar management therapy including silicone versus scar management therapy including silicone We included one study (88 participants). The evidence is very uncertain on the effect of PGT plus scar management therapy including silicone versus scar management therapy including silicone, as assessed by the VSS and POSAS. The evidence is also very uncertain for pain, pruritus, quality of life, adverse events, and adherence. High-pressure versus low-pressure garments We included five studies (262 participants). The evidence is very uncertain on the effect of high pressure versus low pressure PGT on adverse events and adherence. No study used the VSS or the POSAS or assessed pain, pruritus, or quality of life. Different types of PGT (Caroskin Tricot + an adhesive silicone gel sheet versus Gecko Nanoplast (silicone gel bandage)) We included one study (60 participants). The evidence is very uncertain on the effect of Caroskin Tricot versus Gecko Nanoplast on the POSAS, pain, pruritus, and adverse events. The study did not use the VSS or assess quality of life or adherence. Different types of pressure garments (Jobst versus Tubigrip) We included one study (110 participants). The evidence is very uncertain on the adherence to either Jobst or Tubigrip. This study did not report any other outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to recommend using either PGT or an alternative for preventing hypertrophic scarring after burn injury. PGT is already commonly used in practice and it is possible that continuing to do so may provide some benefit to some people. However, until more evidence becomes available, it may be appropriate to allow patient preference to guide therapy.

SMOOTH protocol: A pilot randomised prospective intra-patient single-blinded observational study for examining the mechanistic basis of ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser therapy in treating hypertrophic scarring.

BACKGROUND: Burn injuries are the fourth most common type of trauma and are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The impact of burn injury is clinically significant as burn injuries often give rise to exuberant scarring. Hypertrophic scarring (HTS) is a particular concern as up to 70% of burns patients develop HTS. Laser therapy is used for treating HTS and has shown positive clinical outcomes, although the mechanisms remain unclear limiting approaches to improve its effectiveness. Emerging evidence has shown that fibroblasts and senescent cells are important modifiers of scarring. This study aims to investigate the cellular kinetics in HTS after laser therapy, with a focus on the association of scar reduction with the presence of senescent cells. METHODS: We will conduct a multicentre, intra-patient, single-blinded, randomised controlled longitudinal pilot study with parallel assignments to achieve this objective. 60 participants will be recruited to receive 3 interventional ablative fractional CO2 laser treatments over a 12-month period. Each participant will have two scars randomly allocated to receive either laser treatment or standard care. Biopsies will be obtained from laser-treated, scarred-no treatment and non-scarred tissues for immune-histological staining to investigate the longitudinal kinetics of p16INK4A+-senescent cells and fibroblast subpopulations (CD90+/Thy1+ and αSMA+). Combined subjective scar assessments including Modified Vancouver Scar Scale, Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile; and objective assessment tools including 3D-Vectra-H1 photography, DermaScan® Cortex, Cutometer® and ColoriMeter®DSMIII will be used to evaluate clinical outcomes. These will then be used to investigate the association between senescent cells and scar reduction after laser therapy. This study will also collect blood samples to explore the systemic biomarkers associated with the response to laser therapy. DISCUSSION: This study will provide an improved understanding of mechanisms potentially mediating scar reduction with laser treatment, which will enable better designs of laser treatment regimens for those living with HTS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04736251.

A Randomized Trial of Enteral Glutamine for Treatment of Burn Injuries.

BACKGROUND: Glutamine is thought to have beneficial effects on the metabolic and stress response to severe injury. Clinical trials involving patients with burns and other critically ill patients have shown conflicting results regarding the benefits and risks of glutamine supplementation. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned patients with deep second- or third-degree burns (affecting ≥10% to ≥20% of total body-surface area, depending on age) within 72 hours after hospital admission to receive 0.5 g per kilogram of body weight per day of enterally delivered glutamine or placebo. Trial agents were given every 4 hours through a feeding tube or three or four times a day by mouth until 7 days after the last skin grafting procedure, discharge from the acute care unit, or 3 months after admission, whichever came first. The primary outcome was the time to discharge alive from the hospital, with data censored at 90 days. We calculated subdistribution hazard ratios for discharge alive, which took into account death as a competing risk. RESULTS: A total of 1209 patients with severe burns (mean burn size, 33% of total body-surface area) underwent randomization, and 1200 were included in the analysis (596 patients in the glutamine group and 604 in the placebo group). The median time to discharge alive from the hospital was 40 days (interquartile range, 24 to 87) in the glutamine group and 38 days (interquartile range, 22 to 75) in the placebo group (subdistribution hazard ratio for discharge alive, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.04; P = 0.17). Mortality at 6 months was 17.2% in the glutamine group and 16.2% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.41). No substantial between-group differences in serious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe burns, supplemental glutamine did not reduce the time to discharge alive from the hospital. (Funded by the U.S. Department of Defense and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; RE-ENERGIZE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00985205.).

Vitamin D status and its influence on outcomes following major burn injury and critical illness.

Vitamin D deficiency is common among the general population. It is also observed in up to 76% of critically ill patients. Despite the high prevalence of hypovitaminosis D in critical illness, vitamin D is often overlooked by medical staff as the clinical implications and consequences of vitamin D deficiency in acute contexts remain to be fully understood. Vitamin D has a broad range of pleotropic effects on various processes and systems including the immune-inflammatory response. 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D), has been shown to promote a tolerogenic immune response limiting deleterious inflammatory effects, modulation of the innate immune system, and enhancement of anti-microbial peptides. Vitamin D deficiency is frequently observed in critically ill patients and has been related to extrinsic causes (i.e., limited sunlight exposure), magnitude of injury/illness, or the treatment started by medical doctors including fluid resuscitation. Low levels of vitamin D in critically ill patients have been associated with sepsis, organ failure, and mortality. Despite this, there are subpopulations of critical illness, such as burn patients, where the literature regarding vitamin D status and its influence on outcomes remain insufficient. Thermal injury results in damage to both burned and non-burned tissues, as well as induces an exaggerated and persistent immune-inflammatory and hypermetabolic response. In this review, we propose potential mechanisms in which burn injury affects the vitamin D status and summarizes current literature investigating the influence of vitamin D status on outcomes. In addition, we reviewed the literature and trials investigating vitamin D supplementation in critically ill patients and discuss the therapeutic potential of vitamin D supplementation in burn and critically ill patients. We also highlight current limitations of studies that have investigated vitamin D status and supplementation in critical illness. Thermal injury influences vitamin D status. More studies investigating vitamin D depletion in burn patients and its influence on prognosis, via standardized methodology, are required to reach definitive conclusions and influence clinical practice.

Outcomes important to burns patients during scar management and how they compare to the concepts captured in burn-specific patient reported outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: Pressure garment therapy (PGT) is an established treatment for the prevention and treatment of hypertrophic scarring; however, there is limited evidence for its effectiveness. Burn survivors often experience multiple issues many of which are not adequately captured in current PGT trial measures. To assess the effectiveness of PGT it is important to understand what outcomes matter to patients and to consider whether patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can be used to ascertain the effect of treatments on patients' health-related quality of life. This study aimed to (a) understand the priorities and perspectives of adult burns patients and the parents of burns patients who have experienced PGT via in-depth qualitative data, and (b) compare these with the concepts captured within burn-specific PROMs. METHODS: We undertook 40 semi-structured interviews with adults and parents of paediatric and adolescent burns patients who had experienced PGT to explore their priorities and perspectives on scar management. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. The outcomes interpreted within the interview data were then mapped against the concepts captured within burn-specific PROMs currently in the literature. RESULTS: Eight core outcome domains were identified as important to adult patients and parents: (1) scar characteristics and appearance, (2) movement and function, (3) scar sensation, (4) psychological distress, adjustments and a sense of normality, (5) body image and confidence, (6) engagement in activities, (7) impact on relationships, and (8) treatment burden. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome domains presented reflect a complex holistic patient experience of scar management and treatments such as PGT. Some currently available PROMs do capture the concepts described here, although none assess psychological adjustments and attainment of a sense of normality following burn injury. The routine use of PROMs that represent patient experience and their relative contribution to trial outcome assessment versus clinical measures is now a matter for further research and debate.

The Antibacterial Activity of Acetic Acid against Biofilm-Producing Pathogens of Relevance to Burns Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Localised infections, and burn wound sepsis are key concerns in the treatment of burns patients, and prevention of colonisation largely relies on biocides. Acetic acid has been shown to have good antibacterial activity against various planktonic organisms, however data is limited on efficacy, and few studies have been performed on biofilms. OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate the antibacterial activity of acetic acid against important burn wound colonising organisms growing planktonically and as biofilms. METHODS: Laboratory experiments were performed to test the ability of acetic acid to inhibit growth of pathogens, inhibit the formation of biofilms, and eradicate pre-formed biofilms. RESULTS: Twenty-nine isolates of common wound-infecting pathogens were tested. Acetic acid was antibacterial against planktonic growth, with an minimum inhibitory concentration of 0.16-0.31% for all isolates, and was also able to prevent formation of biofilms (at 0.31%). Eradication of mature biofilms was observed for all isolates after three hours of exposure. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that acetic acid can inhibit growth of key burn wound pathogens when used at very dilute concentrations. Owing to current concerns of the reducing efficacy of systemic antibiotics, this novel biocide application offers great promise as a cheap and effective measure to treat infections in burns patients.

Management of cyanide toxicity in patients with burns.

The importance of cyanide toxicity as a component of inhalational injury in patients with burns is increasingly being recognised, and its prompt recognition and management is vital for optimising burns survival. The evidence base for the use of cyanide antidotes is limited by a lack of randomised controlled trials in humans, and in addition consideration must be given to the concomitant pathophysiological processes in patients with burns when interpreting the literature. We present a literature review of the evidence base for cyanide antidotes with interpretation in the context of patients with burns. We conclude that hydroxycobalamin should be utilised as the first-line antidote of choice in patients with burns with inhalational injury where features consistent with cyanide toxicity are present.

Hydrotherapy in burn care: a survey of hydrotherapy practices in the UK and Ireland and literature review.

INTRODUCTION: Hydrotherapy is widely used in burns management however there are risks associated with its use, in particular cross-infection. Data regarding indications and techniques in common use is deficient. This study aimed to investigate hydrotherapy practices in the UK and Ireland. METHODS: A survey of the hydrotherapy practice of major burn care providers was performed by e mail and where necessary, follow up telephone contact. RESULTS: The survey included 28 burn care providers. 27 reported using hydrotherapy. Only 11 (41%) had defined indication criteria with 4 (15%) implementing a specific protocol. Variations in hydrotherapy practice were seen. CONCLUSION: Hydrotherapy is used nationwide, however considerable variation in practice exists. One area worthy of further consideration is the need for appropriate standards of infection control.