The treatment of paediatric burns with concentrated surfactant gel technology: a case series.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of a surfactant-based technology for the management of burns. METHOD: In a retrospective review, paediatric patients with different types of burns were treated with the gel technology. In some patients, the treatment was combined with a topical antimicrobial agent. Primary objectives of the review were the assessment of healing, healing times and ease of use of the material. RESULTS: The wounds of 15 paediatric patients with different types of burns, particularly with regard to depth and anatomical location, were evaluated using a retrospective chart review. It was found that the surfactant gel technology, with or without the topical antimicrobial agent, assisted in autolytic debridement, and that time to re-epithelialisation was short and within the range of those obtained with other established treatments. CONCLUSION: The number of patients and wounds in this evaluation is small but the study indicates that the gel technology provides a safe and effective way to treat smaller burns in paediatric patients.

Treatment of Burns in Adult Patients With a Concentrated Surfactant Gel: A Real-life Retrospective Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Debridement is often a necessary step in wound care. In burn care, typically, surgery or enzymes are used for this purpose. OBJECTIVE: In a real-life retrospective study, the autolytic debridement properties of a concentrated surfactant gel (CSG) were assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients who had burns that ranged from superficial partial thickness to full thickness and did not exceed 10% total body surface area were evaluated retrospectively with regard to outcomes of their treatment with CSG alone or in combination with bacitracin ointment (CSG-BA). Both materials were applied daily. The hypothesis of the study was that CSG, by providing moisture to the wound in combination with debridement via micelle action, would provide debridement without the need for surgery or enzymes and would lead to healing times similar to those for wounds treated with other modalities. Burn depth was determined visually. RESULTS: Of the CSG-treated burns, 88.2% were mixed partial thickness, deep partial, or full thickness, and 64.7% of these lesions reepithelialized completely or showed satisfactory healing progression within a time frame that is similar to published results with other treatment modalities. Secondary autografting was necessary in 1 lesion. CONCLUSIONS: On average, the CSG-BA-treated burns were less deep and smaller than the CSG alone. All wounds reached complete healing or showed continued healing progress.

Effects of a surfactant-based gel on acute and chronic paediatric wounds: a panel discussion and case series.

On 20 November 2018, following the International Society for Paediatric Wound Care conference, a closed panel meeting took place in which the use of a surfactant-based gel (PluroGel (PMM), Medline Industries, Illinois, US) in paediatric wound care was discussed. The authors shared their experiences, thoughts, experimental data and clinical results. The panel identified the need for a product that can gently cleanse paediatric wounds and remove devitalised tissue without causing discomfort or skin reactions, as well as potentially promote healing. In adults, PMM has been shown to assist healing by hydrating the wound, controlling exudate and debriding non-viable tissue. Islands of neo-epithelium have also been reported to appear rapidly in different parts of the wound bed. No adverse effects on these proliferating cells have been observed. In vitro data suggest that PMM can remove biofilm, as well as potentially promote healing through cell salvage. The panel, therefore, set out to discuss their experiences of using PMM in the paediatric patients and to establish a consensus on the indications for its use and application in this population. This article will describe the main outcomes of that discussion and present case studies from paediatric patients with a variety of wound types, who were treated with PMM by members of the panel.

A multicenter study of preventable contact burns from glass fronted gas fireplaces.

Glass fronted gas fireplaces (GFGFs) have exterior surfaces that can reach extremely high temperatures. Burn injuries from contact with the glass front can be severe with long-term sequelae. The Consumer Product Safety Commission reported that these injuries are uncommon, whereas single-center studies indicate a much higher frequency. The purpose of this multi-institutional study was to determine the magnitude and severity of GFGF injuries in North America. Seventeen burn centers elected to participate in this retrospective chart review. Chart review identified 402 children ≤10 years of age who sustained contact burns from contact with GFGF, who were seen or admitted to the study hospitals from January 2006 to December 2010. Demographic, burn, treatment, and financial data were collected. The mean age of the study group was 16.8 ± 13.3 months. The majority suffered burns to their hands (396, 98.5%), with burns to the face being the second, much less common site (14, 3.5%). Two hundred and sixty-nine required rehabilitation therapy (66.9%). The number of GFGF injuries reported was 20 times greater than the approximately 30 injuries estimated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission's 10-year review. For the affected children, these injuries are painful, often costly and occasionally can lead to long-term sequelae. Given that less than a quarter of burn centers contributed data, the injury numbers reported herein support a need for broader safety guidelines for gas fireplaces in order to have a significant impact on future injuries.

Removal of chest tubes in children without water seal after elective thoracic procedures: a randomized prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Chest tubes are often placed in children after elective thoracic surgical procedures. Depending on surgeon preference, tubes can be pulled directly from suction or after a trial of water seal. Removal of the tube without water seal potentially allows earlier removal, decreased postoperative pain, and earlier discharge from the hospital. No randomized, prospective study has been performed to compare the two methods to determine whether omission of the water seal period is safe after elective thoracic surgery in children. STUDY DESIGN: This is a single-blinded, randomized study conducted between June 1998 and June 2000. Children undergoing elective, noncardiac, nonesophageal thoracic operations were placed into water seal or a nonwater seal groups. Groups were compared for development of pneumothorax or pleural effusion after chest tube removal. RESULTS: Fifty-two children participated in the study, with 28 in group I (suction) and 24 in group II (water seal). Operations included both pulmonary and nonpulmonary thoracic operations performed both thoracoscopically and open. No child developed a major pleural effusion after chest tube removal. Three children (11%) in group I and eight (33%) in group II developed pneumothorax. No child required reinsertion of the chest tube and all were successfully treated with observation and oxygen. There was no marked difference between the groups regarding development of pneumothorax, but the power of the study is low. CONCLUSIONS: A water seal trial is not necessary for safe removal of chest tubes in children undergoing elective surgery. Chest tubes can be removed safely and earlier when pulled directly from suction for both pulmonary and nonpulmonary thoracic pediatric procedures.