ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Various synthetic and biological wound dressings are available for the treatment of superficial burns, and standard care differs among hospitals. Nevertheless, the search for an ideal wound dressing offering a safe healing environment as well as optimal scar quality while being economically attractive is a continuing process. In recent years, Dressilk®, which consists of pure silk, has become the standard of care for the treatment of superficial burns in our hospital. However, no long-term scar-evaluation studies have been performed to compare Dressilk® with the often-used and more expensive Suprathel® in the treatment of superficial burns. METHODS: Subjective and objective scar evaluations were performed three, six, and twelve months after treatment in patients who received simultaneous treatment of 20 superficial burn wounds with both Suprathel® and Dressilk®. The evaluations were performed using the Vancouver Scar Scale, the Cutometer®, Mexameter®, Tewameter®, and the O2C®. RESULTS: Both dressings showed mostly equivalent results in subjective scar evaluations. In the objective scar evaluations, the wounds treated with Dressilk® showed a faster return to the qualities of non-injured skin. Wound areas treated with the two dressings showed no significant differences in elasticity and transepidermal water loss after 12 months. Only oxygen saturation was significantly lower in wound areas treated with Suprathel® (p = 0.008). Subjectively, wound areas treated with Dressilk® showed significantly higher pigmentation after six months, which was not apparent after 12 months. CONCLUSION: Both wound dressings led to esthetically satisfying scar recovery without significant differences from normal uninjured skin after 12 months. Therefore, Dressilk® remains an economically and clinically interesting alternative to Suprathel® for the treatment of superficial burns.
ABSTRACT
Currently, many dressings are commercially available for the treatment of burn wounds. Some of these wound dressings remain on the wound, prevent painful dressing changes, and reduce tissue scarring. Nevertheless, still a wound dressing that is cost-effective, produces good wound healing properties, and has a high patient satisfaction is needed. Standard care of superficial burn wounds differs between burn centres. This study aimed to determine a dressing with easy appliance, accurate pain control, favourable outcome, and cost-effectiveness. Therefore, we compared the widely used but expensive Suprathel with the rather new but much cheaper Dressilk in the clinical setting. In a prospective clinical study, the healing of partial thickness burn wounds after simultaneous treatment with Suprathel and Dressilk was examined in 20 patients intra-individually. During wound healing, pain, infection, exudation, and bleeding were evaluated. A subjective scar evaluation was performed using the Patient and Observer Scar Scale. Both dressings were easy to apply, remained on the wound in place, and were gradually cut back as reepithelisation proceeded and showed similar times to wound closure. Dressing changes were not necessary, and neither infections nor bleeding was detected. Overall exudation and pain were highest in the beginning but declined during the wound-healing phase without significant differences. In the follow-up scar evaluation after 12 months, patients reported overall high satisfaction. Overall, the modern dressings Suprathel and Dressilk (solely made out of pure silk) led to safe wound healing without infection and rapidly reduced pain. There was no need for dressing changes, and they had similar clinical outcomes in scar evaluation. Therefore, both dressings seem to be ideal for the treatment of superficial burns. Because acquisition costs remain one of the main factors in the treatment of burns, Dressilk, which is ~20 times cheaper than Suprathel, remains a good option for the treatment of partial thickness burns.
