Mehdi Dehghani; Negar Azarpira; Vahid Mohammad Karimi; Hamid Mossayebi; Elaheh Esfandiari
Volume 5, Issue 4 , October 2017, , Pages 249-258
Abstract
Objective: To compare the healing process of pressure ulcers treated with cryopreserved human amniotic membrane allograft and routine pressure ulcer care in our hospital.Methods: From January 2012 to December 2013, in a prospective randomized clinical trial (IRCT201612041335N2), 24 patients with second ...
Read More
Objective: To compare the healing process of pressure ulcers treated with cryopreserved human amniotic membrane allograft and routine pressure ulcer care in our hospital.Methods: From January 2012 to December 2013, in a prospective randomized clinical trial (IRCT201612041335N2), 24 patients with second and third stage of pressure ulcers were enrolled in this study. All patients needed split-thickness skin grafts for pressure ulcer-wound coverage. Selected patients had symmetric ulcers on both upper and lower extremities. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: amnion and control. In the amnion group, the ulcer was covered with cryopreserved amniotic membrane and in the control group it was treated with local Dilantin powder application. The duration and success rate of complete healing was compared between the two groups.Results: The study group was composed of 24 pressure ulcers in 24 patients (19 males and 5 females) with a mean age of 44±12.70 years. The demographic characteristics, ulcer area, and underlying diseases were similar in both groups. The early sign of response, such as decrease in wound discharge, was detected 12-14 days after biological dressing. Complete pressure ulcer healing occurred only in the amnion group (p< 0.001). Partial healing was significantly higher in the amnion group (p< 0.03). Healing time in this group was faster than that the control group (20 days versus 54 days). No major complication was recorded with amniotic membrane dressing.Conclusion: Cryopreserved amniotic membrane is an effective biologic dressing that promotes re-epithelialization in pressure ulcers.
Abdolkhalegh Keshavarzi; Mehdi Ayaz; Maryam Dehghankhalili
Volume 4, Issue 4 , October 2016, , Pages 197-201
Abstract
Objective: To compare the outcome of patients with up to 60% total body surface area (TBSA) thermal burns undergoing ultra-early and early excision and grafting.Methods: This historical cohort study was performed in two referral burn centers of Shiraz during a 1-year period from 2015 to 2016. We included ...
Read More
Objective: To compare the outcome of patients with up to 60% total body surface area (TBSA) thermal burns undergoing ultra-early and early excision and grafting.Methods: This historical cohort study was performed in two referral burn centers of Shiraz during a 1-year period from 2015 to 2016. We included those patients with thermal burns up to 60% TBSA who underwent ultra-early (48-72 hours) and early (7-10 days) excision and grafting. We excluded those who were hemodynamically unstable and those with electrical burns. The outcome of patients was determined by graft success, operation duration, blood loss, hospital length of stay and mortality rate. Results: We included a total number of 107 patients with mean age of 32.1 ± 11.6 years. There were 65 (60.7%) men and 42 (39.3%) women among the patients. Both study groups were comparable regarding the baseline characteristics. Ultra-early excision and grafting was associated with more, higher graft success rate (p=0.048), lower infection rate (p=0.037), shorter hospital length of stay (p=0.044) and lower mortality rate (p=0.027).Conclusion: Ultra-early excision and grafting in patients with thermal burns covering less than 60% TBSA was associated with higher graft success rate, shorter hospital length of stay, lower infection rate and lower mortality rate when compared to early surgery.
