Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
An. bras. dermatol ; 92(4): 499-504, July-Aug. 2017. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-887007

ABSTRACT

Abstract: Background: Venous ulcers represent 70% of the lower limb ulcers. They are difficult to heal, requiring a correct diagnostic and therapeutic approach. Many products have been developed to healing, such as homologous platelet gel obtained from the platelet concentrate exceeding from blood transfusion. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of homologous platelet gel in venous ulcers compared with hydrocolloid dressing. Method: A pilot randomized clinical trial in patients with venous ulcers. Randomized groups (homologous platelet gel and hydrocolloid groups) were followed for 90 days and were assessed through the evolution of ulcerated area, qualitative analysis of vascularization and adverse events. Both groups used elastic compression. Results: We included 16 participants, with a total of 21 venous ulcers. Both treatments promoted a reduction of the areas of the ulcers in 90 days (mean 69%), there was significant difference between the groups concerning the gradual reduction of the ulcers areas, favorably to the hydrocolloid (70% vs 64%; p <0.01). There were some mild adverse events in both groups. Study limitations: Single-center study with a small number of patients, preventing more accurate assessment of the effects of platelet gel. Conclusion: The homologous platelet gel associated with the elastic compression can be an alternative to the venous ulcer treatment and is safe due to the occurrence of a few mild local adverse events and no serious adverse events. Clinical trials with larger numbers of patients must be performed to maintain the indication of this treatment for venous ulcer.


Subject(s)
Humans , Adolescent , Adult , Middle Aged , Young Adult , Varicose Ulcer/therapy , Wound Healing/physiology , Bandages, Hydrocolloid , Platelet-Rich Plasma , Wound Healing/drug effects , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Bandages, Hydrocolloid/adverse effects , Bandages, Hydrocolloid/standards , Gels
2.
Rev. bras. cir. plást ; 30(2): 273-276, 2015. ilus
Article in English, Portuguese | LILACS | ID: biblio-1018

ABSTRACT

INTRODUÇÃO: O objetivo deste estudo é relatar a nossa experiência com curativo de colágeno e alginato (Fibracol®) para cobrir áreas doadoras de enxerto de pele de espessura parcial. MÉTODO: Estudamos, retrospectivamente, 35 prontuários de pacientes que utilizaram o Fibracol® em áreas doadoras. Nossa rotina para cobrir a área doadora é a seguinte: cobertura da área com uma ou mais unidades de Fibracol® e, em seguida, com uma película à prova de água. Depois de três ou quatro dias, remover o curativo, limpar delicadamente com soro fisiológico e gaze e, quando julgava-se necessário, cobria-se novamente. A idade média foi de 25,52 anos (1-65). RESULTADOS: A coxa foi usada como área doadora em 29 pacientes, o braço em 2, a perna em 4 e tronco em 3 (2 pacientes tiveram mais de uma área doadora). O tempo médio necessário para epitelização foi de 4,51 dias (3-8). O valor de R do coeficiente de correlação de Pearson correlacionando a idade e tempo de epitelização foi -0,0755, com p = 0,6685. Nenhum dos pacientes teve infecção na área doadora. O curativo ideal para a área doadora do enxerto de pele de espessura parcial teria muitas características, incluindo: preço baixo, bom conforto do paciente, baixa taxa de infecção, período curto de tempo para epitelização, etc. CONCLUSÃO: Os autores relatam uma boa experiência usando Fibracol® em 35 pacientes, durante um período de 22 meses. O tempo para epitelização foi de 4,51 dias, mais curta do que a maioria dos trabalhos publicados, e não tinha correlação com a idade do paciente.


INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to report our findings with a collagen and alginate dressing (Fibracol®) used to cover donor areas of partial-thickness skin grafts. METHOD: We retrospectively evaluated the medical records of 35 patients in whom Fibracol® was used on donor areas. The routine used to manage the donor area is as follows: The area is covered with one or more units of Fibracol®, followed by application of a waterproof film. After three or four days, the dressing is removed and the area cleaned gently with saline and gauze; the area is dressed again if necessary. The mean patient age was 25.52 years (range, 1-65 years). RESULTS: The thigh was used as the donor area in 29 patients, the arm in 2, the leg in 4, and the trunk in 3. Two patients had more than one donor area. The mean time needed for epithelization was 4.51 days (range, 3-8 days). The Pearson correlation coefficient value correlating age and time of epithelization was -0.0755; p = 0.6685. None of the patients experienced an infection in the donor area. The ideal dressing for the donor area of split-thickness skin grafts would have multiple characteristics including low price, good patient comfort, low infection rate, and a short epithelization period. CONCLUSION: The authors report a positive experience with the use of Fibracol® in 35 patients over a period of 22 months. The mean epithelization period was 4.51 days, shorter than that in the majority of published studies, and had no correlation with the age of the patient.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , History, 21st Century , Bandages , Burns , Medical Records , Retrospective Studies , Collagen , Skin Transplantation , Bandages, Hydrocolloid , Alginates , Bandages/adverse effects , Bandages/standards , Burns/surgery , Burns/therapy , Medical Records/standards , Collagen/therapeutic use , Skin Transplantation/methods , Bandages, Hydrocolloid/adverse effects , Bandages, Hydrocolloid/standards , Alginates/therapeutic use
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL