|
|
MOIST
HEALING AND WOUND CARE INCLUDING BURNS
|
|
(Advantages
and Current Approaches)
|
| |
Section
IV. MOIST WOUND HEALING FOR THE BURN WOUND?
Continued . . .
2
) Penetration of Sulfamylon Solution
Burn
Tissue Concentration of Sulfamylon ( 5% Solution vs.
11% Cream )
|
|
|
|
*
5% Sulfamylon solution penetrates devitalized tissue
better than the cream base sulfamylon |
3)
Effect of Sulfamylon Solution in Re-epithelialization
Impact
of Sulfamylon Solution on Epithelialization Rate of A Human
Meshed Skin Graft (1.5 - 1)
Conclusion:
Sulfamylon solution does not retard epithelialization on a
clean wound compared to saline and significantly increases
epithealization rate of a contaminated mesh graft by control
of surface bacteria. (Burns 1999-25;237)
4)
Use of 5% Sulfamylon (Mafenide) Solution in Burns
(Reported
side effects as % of total use)
|
|
|
|
(J
Burn Care Rehab 1993:14;158) (J Burn Care Rehab
1988:9;602) |
4
) Maintaining Moisture of Surface
Comparison
of Neo-eschar Formation and Surface Desiccation
|
5%
Solution versus Cream |
|
|
|
The
high osmolarity of a cream base removes surface
moisture causing a neo-eschar. The 5% solution is
isosmolar leading to a moist surface. (J
Trauma 1983:23;878) |
5
) Sulfamylon Solution: Pain on Application.
Comparison
of Pain from Sulfamylon Products
|
( 5 % Solution vs. 11% Cream ) |
|
|
|
There is minimal pain with use of
the solution |
|
( Arch Surg. 1975:110;1446) ( J
Trauma 1983:23;878) |
Use
of 5% Sulfamylon Solutions
Go back to top
  
|
