Cell salvage in burn excisional surgery.

BACKGROUND: Hemostasis during burn surgery is difficult to achieve, and high blood loss commonly occurs. Bleeding control measures are limited, and many patients require allogeneic blood transfusions. Cell salvage is a well-known method used to reduce transfusions. However, its evidence in burns is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the feasibility of cell salvage during burn surgery. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective, observational study was conducted with 16 patients (20 measurements) scheduled for major burn surgery. Blood was recovered by washing saturated gauze pads with heparinized saline, which was then processed using the Cell Saver. Erythrocyte concentrate quality was analyzed by measuring hemoglobin, hematocrit, potassium, and free hemoglobin concentration. Microbial contamination was assessed based on cultures at every step of the process. Differences in blood samples were tested using the Student's t-test. RESULTS: The red blood cell mass recovered was 29 ± 11% of the mass lost. Patients' preoperative hemoglobin and hematocrit levels were 10.5 ± 1.8 g/dL and 0.33 ± 0.05 L/L, respectively. The erythrocyte concentrate showed hemoglobin and hematocrit levels of 13.2 ± 3.9 g/dL and 0.40 ± 0.11 L/L thus showing a concentration effect. The potassium level was lower in the erythrocyte concentrate (2.5 ± 1.5 vs. 4.1 ± 0.4 mmol/L, p < 0.05). The free hemoglobin level was low (0.16 ± 0.21 µmol/L). All cultures of the erythrocyte concentrate showed bacterial growth compared to 21% of wound cultures. CONCLUSION: Recovering erythrocytes during burn excisional surgery using cell salvage is possible. Despite strict sterile handling, erythrocyte concentrates of all patients showed bacterial contamination. The consequence of this contamination remains unclear and should be investigated in future studies.

Topical treatment for facial burns.

BACKGROUND: Burn injuries are an important health problem. They occur frequently in the head and neck region. The face is the area central to a person's identity that provides our most expressive means of communication. Topical interventions are currently the cornerstone of treatment of burns to the face. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of topical interventions on wound healing in people with facial burns of any depth. SEARCH METHODS: In December 2019 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of topical treatment for facial burns were eligible for inclusion in this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: In this first update, we included 12 RCTs, comprising 507 participants. Most trials included adults admitted to specialised burn centres after recent burn injuries. Topical agents included antimicrobial agents (silver sulphadiazine (SSD), Aquacel-Ag, cerium-sulphadiazine, gentamicin cream, mafenide acetate cream, bacitracin), non-antimicrobial agents (Moist Exposed Burn Ointment (MEBO), saline-soaked dressings, skin substitutes (including bioengineered skin substitute (TransCyte), allograft, and xenograft (porcine Xenoderm), and miscellaneous treatments (growth hormone therapy, recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor hydrogel (rhGMCS)), enzymatic debridement, and cream with Helix Aspersa extract). Almost all the evidence included in this review was assessed as low or very low-certainty, often because of high risk of bias due to unclear randomisation procedures (i.e. sequence generation and allocation concealment); lack of blinding of participants, providers and sometimes outcome assessors; and imprecision resulting from few participants, low event rates or both, often in single studies. Topical antimicrobial agents versus topical non-antimicrobial agents There is moderate-certainty evidence that there is probably little or no difference between antimicrobial agents and non-antimicrobial agents (SSD and MEBO) in time to complete wound healing (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.85, 1 study, 39 participants). Topical antimicrobial agents may make little or no difference to the proportion of wounds completely healed compared with topical non-antimicrobial agents (comparison SSD and MEBO, risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.29; 1 study, 39 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in wound infection (comparison topical antimicrobial agent (Aquacel-Ag) and MEBO; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.21; 1 study, 40 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported change in wound surface area over time or partial wound healing. There is low-certainty evidence for the secondary outcomes scar quality and patient satisfaction. Two studies assessed pain but it was incompletely reported. Topical antimicrobial agents versus other topical antimicrobial agents It is uncertain whether topical antimicrobial agents make any difference in effects as the evidence is low to very low-certainty. For primary outcomes, there is low-certainty evidence for time to partial (i.e. greater than 90%) wound healing (comparison SSD versus cerium SSD: mean difference (MD) -7.10 days, 95% CI -16.43 to 2.23; 1 study, 142 participants). There is very low-certainty evidence regarding whether topical antimicrobial agents make a difference to wound infection (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.17; 1 study, 15 participants). There is low to very low-certainty evidence for the proportion of facial burns requiring surgery, pain, scar quality, adverse effects and length of hospital stay. Skin substitutes versus topical antimicrobial agents There is low-certainty evidence that a skin substitute may slightly reduce time to partial (i.e. greater than 90%) wound healing, compared with a non-specified antibacterial agent (MD -6.00 days, 95% CI -8.69 to -3.31; 1 study, 34 participants). We are uncertain whether skin substitutes in general make any other difference in effects as the evidence is very low certainty. Outcomes included wound infection, pain, scar quality, adverse effects of treatment and length of hospital stay. Single studies showed contrasting low-certainty evidence. A bioengineered skin substitute may slightly reduce procedural pain (MD -4.00, 95% CI -5.05 to -2.95; 34 participants) and background pain (MD -2.00, 95% CI -3.05 to -0.95; 34 participants) compared with an unspecified antimicrobial agent. In contrast, a biological dressing (porcine Xenoderm) might slightly increase pain in superficial burns (MD 1.20, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.75; 15 participants (30 wounds)) as well as deep partial thickness burns (MD 3.00, 95% CI 2.34 to 3.66; 10 participants (20 wounds)), compared with antimicrobial agents (Physiotulle Ag (Coloplast)). Miscellaneous treatments versus miscellaneous treatments Single studies show low to very low-certainty effects of interventions. Low-certainty evidence shows that MEBO may slightly reduce time to complete wound healing compared with saline soaked dressing (MD -1.7 days, 95% CI -3.32 to -0.08; 40 participants). In addition, a cream containing Helix Aspersa may slightly increase the proportion of wounds completely healed at 14 days compared with MEBO (RR 4.77, 95% CI 1.87 to 12.15; 43 participants). We are uncertain whether any miscellaneous treatment in the included studies makes a difference in effects for the outcomes wound infection, scar quality, pain and patient satisfaction as the evidence is low to very low-certainty. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is mainly low to very low-certainty evidence on the effects of any topical intervention on wound healing in people with facial burns. The number of RCTs in burn care is growing, but the body of evidence is still hampered due to an insufficient number of studies that follow appropriate evidence-based standards of conducting and reporting RCTs.

Regrafting of the Split-Thickness Skin Graft Donor-Site: Is It Beneficial?

Split-thickness skin grafting remains a fundamental treatment for patients with deep burns and other traumatic injuries. Unfortunately, the donor site wound that remains after split skin graft (SSG) harvesting may also cause problems for the patient; they can lead to discomfort and scars with a poor cosmetic outcome. Regrafting of the donor site is one of the methods described to improve donor site healing and scarring. In this report, we describe a case of a 26-year-old woman with a self-inflicted chemical burn (0.5% TBSA) who underwent split skin grafting. During surgery, only part of the donor site was regrafted with split skin graft remnants. This part healed faster and had a better scar quality at 3 months postsurgery. Nevertheless, the appearance and patients' opinion on the regrafted part deteriorated after 12 months. With this case report, we aim to create awareness of the long-term consequences of regrafting, which may differ from short-time results. Patients expected to have poor reepithelialization potential may benefit from regrafting of the SSG on the donor site. But in healthy young individuals, timewise there would be no benefit since it can lead to an aesthetically displeasing result.

Health related quality of life in adults after burn injuries: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQL) is essential to qualify the subjective burden of burns in survivors. We performed a systematic review of HRQL studies in adult burn patients to evaluate study design, instruments used, methodological quality, and recovery patterns. METHODS: A systematic review was performed. Relevant databases were searched from the earliest record until October 2016. Studies examining HRQL in adults after burn injuries were included. Risk of bias was scored using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. RESULTS: Twenty different HRQL instruments were used among the 94 included studies. The Burn Specific Health Scale-Brief (BSHS-B) (46%), the Short Form-36 (SF-36) (42%) and the EuroQol questionnaire (EQ-5D) (9%) were most often applied. Most domains, both mentally and physically orientated, were affected shortly after burns but improved over time. The lowest scores were reported for the domains 'work' and 'heat sensitivity' (BSHS-B), 'bodily pain', 'physical role limitations' (SF-36), and 'pain/discomfort' (EQ-5D) in the short-term and for 'work' and 'heat sensitivity', 'emotional functioning' (SF-36), 'physical functioning' and 'pain/discomfort' in the long-term. Risk of bias was generally low in outcome measurement and high in study attrition. CONCLUSION: Consensus on preferred validated methodologies of HRQL measurement in burn patients would facilitate comparability across studies, resulting in improved insights in recovery patterns and better estimates of HRQL after burns. We recommend to develop a guideline on the measurement of HRQL in burns. Five domains representing a variety of topics had low scores in the long-term and require special attention in the aftermath of burns.

Long-term scar quality after hydrosurgical versus conventional debridement of deep dermal burns (HyCon trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Deep dermal burns require tangential excision of non-viable tissue and skin grafting to improve wound healing and burn-scar quality. Tangential excision is conventionally performed with a knife, but during the last decade hydrosurgery has become popular as a new tool for tangential excision. Hydrosurgery is generally thought to be a more precise and controlled manner of burn debridement leading to preservation of viable tissue and, therefore, better scar quality. Although scar quality is considered to be one of the most important outcomes in burn surgery today, no randomized controlled study has compared the effect of these two common treatment modalities with scar quality as a primary outcome. The aim of this study is, therefore, to compare long-term scar quality after hydrosurgical versus conventional tangential excision in deep dermal burns. METHODS/DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized, intra-patient, controlled trial will be conducted in the Dutch burn centers of Rotterdam, Beverwijk, and Groningen. All patients with deep dermal burns that require excision and grafting are eligible. Exclusion criteria are: a burn wound < 50 cm2, total body surface area (TBSA) burned > 30%, full-thickness burns, chemical or electrical burns, infected wounds (clinical symptoms in combination with positive wound swabs), insufficient knowledge of the Dutch or English language, patients that are unlikely to comply with requirements of the study protocol and follow-up, and patients who are (temporarily) incompetent because of sedation and/or intubation. A total of 137 patients will be included. Comparable wound areas A and B will be appointed, randomized and either excised conventionally with a knife or with the hydrosurgery system. The primary outcome is scar quality measured by the observer score of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS); a subjective scar-assessment instrument, consisting of two separate six-item scales (observer and patient) that are both scored on a 10-point rating scale. DISCUSSION: This study will contribute to the optimal surgical treatment of patients with deep dermal burn wounds. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register, NTR6232 . Registered on 23 January 2017.

Adequacy of a hospital-wide standard dose of 7mg/kg bodyweight gentamicin sufficient to achieve an adequate prophylactic maximum serum concentration (Cmax) in burn patients undergoing surgical burn wound treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Pharmacokinetics of drugs can be significantly altered in burn patients. The aim of our study was to validate if the current hospital-wide standard dosage of 7mg/kg total bodyweight gentamicin is sufficient to achieve an adequate prophylactic Cmax (Cmax≥20mg/L). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational cohort pharmacokinetic study was conducted in burn patients undergoing surgical burn wound treatment. RESULTS: 36/40 (90%) burn patients undergoing surgical burn wound treatment at Rotterdam Burn Centre (Maasstad Hospital), the Netherlands, achieved adequate prophylactic serum concentrations (Cmax≥20mg/L) after a single prophylactic intravenous dose of 7mg/kg total bodyweight gentamicin. Total Body Surface Area (TBSA) burned and total bodyweight were statistically significantly correlated with the Cmax, with correlation coefficients of -0.316, 0.443 and p values of 0.047, 0.004, respectively. Other covariates (age, time after injury, serum creatinine, dose, gender, intensive care admittance) were not statistically significantly correlated. Occurrence of postoperative infection was limited (n=1), no statistically significant difference was observed between patients with a therapeutic and patients with a subtherapeutic serum concentration. CONCLUSION: The current hospital-wide standard dosage of 7mg/kg total bodyweight is sufficient to achieve an adequate prophylactic Cmax in burn patients undergoing surgical burn wound treatment.

Epidemiology and screening of intentional burns in children in a Dutch burn centre.

International estimates of the incidence of non-accidental burns (NAB) in children admitted to burn centres vary from 1% to 25%. Hardly any data about Dutch figures exist. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence, treatment and outcome of burns due to suspected child abuse in paediatric burns. We described the process of care and outcome, including the accuracy of the SPUTOVAMO screening tool and examined child, burn and treatment characteristics related to suspicions of child abuse or neglect. A retrospective study was conducted in children aged 0-17 years with a primary admission after burn injuries to the burn centre Rotterdam in the period 2009-2013. Data on patient, injury and treatment characteristics were collected, using the Dutch Burn Repository R3. In addition, medical records were reviewed. In 498 paediatric admissions, suspected child abuse or neglect was present in 43 children (9%). 442 screening questionnaires (89%) were completed. In 52 out of 442 questionnaires (12%) the completed SPUTOVAMO had one or more positive signs. Significant independent predictors for suspected child abuse were burns in the genital area or buttocks (OR=3.29; CI: 143-7.55) and a low socio-economic status (OR=2.52; 95%CI: 1.30-4.90). The incidence of suspected child abuse indicating generation of additional support in our population is comparable to studies with a similar design in other countries.

External validation of the revised Baux score for the prediction of mortality in patients with acute burn injury.

BACKGROUND: Since the original Baux score was outdated and inhalation injury was recognized as an important contributor to mortality, Osler et al. developed a revised Baux score for the prediction of mortality of burn patients in an American population.The aim of this study was to validate the revised Baux score with data of patients admitted to the Rotterdam Burn Center (RBC) in the Netherlands. METHODS: Prospectively collected data were analyzed for all patients with acute burn injury admitted to the RBC from 1987 to 2009 (n = 4,389), including sex, age, total body surface area involved, inhalation injury, mortality, and premorbid conditions.Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between mortality and possible contributing variables. The discriminative power of the revised Baux score was assessed by receiver operating characteristics curve analysis. RESULTS: Overall mortality in our center was 6.5%; mortality in patients with intention to treat was 4.4%. Age, total body surface area, inhalation injury, as well as premorbid circulatory and central nervous system conditions were significant independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. Revised Baux score in the RBC population (area under the curve, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.97) performed less specific and sensitive in a selected group of patients with high Baux scores (area under the curve, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.84). CONCLUSION: The revised Baux score is a simple and accurate model for predicting mortality in patients with acute burn injuries in a burn center setting. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.

Topical treatment for facial burns.

BACKGROUND: Burn injuries are an important health problem. They occur frequently in the head and neck region - the area central to a person's identity, that provides our most expressive means of communication. Topical interventions are currently the cornerstone of treatment of partial-thickness burns to the face. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of topical interventions on wound healing in people with facial burns of any depth. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 12 November 2012); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 10); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to November Week 1 2012); Ovid MEDLINE - In-process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (searched November 12, 2012); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2012 Week 45); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 9 November 2012) for relevant trials. We did not apply date or language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of topical treatment for facial burns were eligible for inclusion in this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed and included the references identified by the search strategy. Included trials were assessed using a risk of bias form, and data were extracted using a standardised data extraction sheet. For dichotomous and continuous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios and mean differences, respectively, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs, comprising a total of 119 participants. Two studies compared two different antimicrobial agents and three compared a biological or bioengineered skin substitute with an antimicrobial agent. All studies had small sample sizes and were at high risk of bias. Heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes prevented pooling of data. In three studies time to complete wound healing was significantly shorter for those using a skin substitute than for those using an antibacterial agent, but the quality of the evidence was low. Pain was significantly reduced with the use of skin substitutes in both studies that reported this outcome in all groups, range mean differences -2.00 (95% CI -3.82 to -0.18) to -4.00 (95% CI -5.05 to -2.95) on a 10-point scale. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient high quality research and evidence to enable conclusions to be drawn about the effects of topical interventions on wound healing in people with facial burns.

The implementation and evaluation of therapeutic touch in burn patients: an instructive experience of conducting a scientific study within a non-academic nursing setting.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of therapeutic touch (TT) in the nursing of burn patients; post hoc evaluation of the research process in a non-academic nursing setting. METHODS: 38 burn patients received either TT or nursing presence. On admission, days 2, 5 and 10 of hospitalization, data were collected on anxiety for pain, salivary cortisol, and pain medication. Interviews with nurses were held concerning research in a non-academic setting. RESULTS: Anxiety for pain was more reduced on day 10 in the TT-group. The TT-group was prescribed less morphine on day 1 and 2. On day 2 cortisol level before dressing changes was higher in the TT-group. The situational challenges of this study led to inconsistencies in data collection and a high patient attrition rate, weakening its statistical power. CONCLUSION: Conducting an effect study within daily nursing practice should not be done with a nursing staff inexperienced in research. Analysis of the remaining data justifies further research on TT for burn patients with pain, anxiety for pain, and cortisol levels as outcomes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Administering and evaluating TT during daily care requires nurses experienced both in TT and research, thus leading to less attrition and missing data, increasing the power of future studies.

Effectiveness of cerium nitrate-silver sulfadiazine in the treatment of facial burns: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The face is a very frequent site of burn injuries. This multicenter, randomized, controlled trial thus investigates the effectiveness of cerium nitrate-silver sulfadiazine in the treatment of facial burns compared with silver sulfadiazine. METHODS: Adult patients with acute facial burns admitted to Dutch burn centers were randomized to treatment with either cerium nitrate-silver sulfadiazine or silver sulfadiazine. Primary outcome was need for surgery and time to wound healing. Aesthetic and functional outcome was assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months after burn. RESULTS: From March of 2006 until January of 2009, 179 patients were randomized and 154 could be included. The two groups of patients (cerium nitrate-silver sulfadiazine group, n=78; silver sulfadiazine group, n=76), were comparable regarding sex, age, percentage total body surface area burned, and cause. During admission, four patients died, leaving 77 and 73 patients for primary analyses, respectively. Surgery was required in 13 (16.9 percent) compared with 15 patients (20.5 percent) (p=0.57; odds ratio, 0.8; 95 percent CI, 0.3 to 1.8), respectively. Median time to wound healing was 11.0 days in the cerium nitrate-silver sulfadiazine group (interquartile range, 7.0 to 15.0) and 9.0 days for silver sulfadiazine group (interquartile range, 5.0 to 15.75) (p=0.17). There were no significant differences in functional and aesthetic outcome. CONCLUSIONS: No differences were found in effectiveness of both treatments. The vast majority of facial burns do not require surgery, and treatment with cerium nitrate-silver sulfadiazine and silver sulfadiazine leads to satisfactory outcome, both aesthetically and functionally. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.

Burns and injuries from non-electric-appliance fires in low- and middle-income countries Part II. A strategy for intervention using the Haddon Matrix.

A large proportion of burns in developing countries are related to the nature of domestic appliances used for cooking, heating, and lighting. Our overview of the problem elucidated the need for better surveillance with epidemiologic studies, which will more accurately assess the true incidence in vulnerable populations. This paper will create a framework for envisaging new approaches to the problem and begin to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of proposed interventions. We used the Haddon Matrix to accumulate proposed interventions that encompass a pre-event, event, and post-event timeline. We propose an initial strategic outline plan for interventions based on values that are suited to the problem and the setting, are culturally appropriate, and can be employed in a reasonable period of time for a sustained period to ensure success. Recommended action steps include promoting the use of alternative energy sources, encouraging an integrated approach to finding interdisciplinary solutions, devising a better system of kerosene containerization, re-engineering appliance designs, legislating for enforcement of health and safety standards, taking a holistic approach through government inter-departmental collaboration, formally discouraging corruption, encouraging ventilation of cooking or living areas, implementing building codes, educating consumers, and training caregivers and health and emergency workers.

Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the American Burn Association/Shriners Hospital for Children Burn Outcomes Questionnaire (5-18 years of age).

The American Burn Association/Shriners Hospital for Children Burn Outcomes Questionnaire (BOQ) is a self-administered questionnaire to monitor functional outcome after burns in children and adolescents. This study aimed to assess feasibility, reliability, and validity of the Dutch BOQ. The BOQ was adapted into Dutch and tested in a population of children and adolescents aged 5 to 15 years who were primary admissions to a Dutch or Belgian burn center (n = 6) during the period of March 2001 through February 2004. To assess validity, the Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ) and the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) were included. Response rate was 53% among parents (n = 145) and 48% among adolescents (n = 52). Internal consistency of the BOQ scales was good (Cronbach's alpha >0.7 in all but one scale). Test and retest results were similar; there were no significant differences between parents and adolescents in this respect. Expected high correlations between BOQ scales and conceptually equivalent CHQ and EQ-5D scales were found in eight of 12 comparisons. Eleven scales showed significant differences in the expected direction between children with a long length of stay versus those with a short length of stay. The Dutch BOQ can be used to evaluate functional outcome after burns in children aged 5 years and older. Our study showed that the Dutch BOQ is a feasible instrument with good reliability and validity.