Prospective randomised controlled trial of AlgisiteTMM, CuticerinTM, and Sorbact® as donor site dressings in paediatric splitthickness skin grafts

25Citations
Citations of this article
67Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: This is a parallel three-arm prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing AlgisiteTMM, CuticerinTM, and Sorbact® as donor site dressings in paediatric split-thickness skin grafts (STSG). All three were in current use within the Pegg Leditschke Children's Burn centre (PLCBC), the largest paediatric burns centre in Queensland, Australia. Our objective was to find the best performing dressing, following on from previous trials designed to rationalise dressings for the burn wound itself. Methods: All children for STSG, with thigh donor sites, were considered for enrolment in the trial. Primary outcome measures were days to re-epithelialisation, and pain. Secondary measures were cost, itch, and scarring at 3 and 6 months. Patients and parents were blinded to group assignment. Blinding of assessors was possible with the dressing in situ, with partial blinding following first dressing change. Blinded photographic assessments of reepithelialisation were used. Scar assessment was blinded. Covariates for analysis were sex, age, and graft thickness (as measured from a central biopsy). Results: There were 101 patients randomised to the AlgisiteTMM (33), CuticerinTM(32), and Sorbact® (36) arms between April 2015 and July 2016. All were analysed for time to re-epithelialisation. Pain scores were not available for all time points in all patients. There were no significant differences between the three arms regarding pain, or time to re-epithelialisation. There were no significant differences for the secondary outcomes of itch, scarring, or cost. Regression analyses demonstrated faster re-epithelialisation in younger patients and decreased donor site scarring at 3 and 6 months with thinner STSG. There were no adverse effects noted. Conclusions: There are no data supporting a preference for one trial dressing over the others, in donor site wounds (DSW) in children. Thinner skin grafts lead to less donor site scarring in children. Younger patients have faster donor site wound healing.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McBride, C. A., Kimble, R. M., & Stockton, K. A. (2018). Prospective randomised controlled trial of AlgisiteTMM, CuticerinTM, and Sorbact® as donor site dressings in paediatric splitthickness skin grafts. Burns and Trauma, 6(33). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41038-018-0135-y

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free