Polyurethane Foam Dressings Research Articles

Dry dressing for epidermal sloughing after subcutaneous azacitidine injection in a myelodysplastic syndrome.

Dry dressing for epidermal sloughing after subcutaneous azacitidine injection in a myelodysplastic syndrome.

A multi-center, randomized, clinical trial comparing adhesive polyurethane foam dressing and adhesive hydrocolloid dressing in patients with grade II pressure ulcers in primary care and nursing homes

BackgroundPressure ulcers (PrUs) are ischemic wounds in the skin and underlying tissues caused by long-standing pressure force over an external bone or cartilaginous surface. PrUs are an important challenge for the overall health system because can prolong patient hospitalization and reduce quality of life. Moreover, 95% of PrUs are avoidable, suggesting they are caused by poor quality care assistance. PrUs are also costly, increasing national costs. For example, they represent about 5% of overall annual health expenses in Spain. Stages I and II PrUs have a combined prevalence of 65%. According main clinical guidelines, stage II PrUs (PrU-IIs) are usually treated by applying special dressings (polyurethane or hydrocolloid). However, little scientific evidence regarding their efficacy has been identified in scientific literature. Our aim is to assess the comparative efficacy of adhesive polyurethane foam and hydrocolloid dressings in the treatment of PrU-IIs in terms of healed ulcer after 8 weeks of follow-up.Methods/designThis paper describes the development and evaluation protocol of a randomized clinical trial of two parallel treatment arms. A total of 820 patients with at least 1 PrU-II will be recruited from primary health care and home care centers. All patients will receive standardized healing procedures and preventive measures (e.g. positional changes and pressure-relieving support surfaces), following standardized procedures. The main outcome will be the percentage of wounds healed after 8 weeks. Secondary outcomes will include cost-effectiveness, as evaluated by cost per healed ulcer and cost per treated patient and safety evaluated by adverse events.DiscussionThis trial will address the hypothesis that hydrocolloid dressings will heal at least 10% more stage II PrUs and be more cost-effective than polyurethane foam dressings after 8 weeks.Trial registrationThis trial has been registered with controlled-trials number ISCRCTN57842461 and EudraCT 2012-003945-14.

Pressure Ulcer Treatment in Pediatric Patients

To assess pressure ulcer (PrU) treatment in Swiss hospitalized pediatric patients and to determine whether there are differences in PrU treatment, according to demographic characteristics of the patients. A descriptive multicenter point prevalence study was conducted in June 2009 in all German-speaking pediatric hospitals in Switzerland. All hospitalized patients from birth up to 17 years or younger in 14 Swiss pediatric hospitals, including all pediatric departments, were assessed. A total of 412 patients participated in this study. The instrument and method of the Dutch National Prevalence Measurement of Care Problems were used. Thirty-five percent of the patients had a PrU. Almost all of these PrUs (94.1%) were of category 1. The most severe PrUs occurred in patients older than 8 years. Age of the patient and department were the only characteristics that significantly influenced the occurrence of PrU categories 2 to 4. Pressure ulcer categories 2 to 4 were mostly covered with hydrocolloid or polyurethane foam dressings. No pediatric-specific guideline regarding PrU treatment is used in the involved hospitals. Most patients had category 1 PrUs, so appropriate prevention to decrease any further trauma in these patients was necessary. Severe PrUs (categories 2-4) are mostly limited to older pediatric (aged >8 years) patients with chronic conditions or after surgery intervention. A PrU treatment guideline adapted for pediatric needs is recommended.

Foam dressings for venous leg ulcers.

Venous leg ulcers are a common and recurring type of chronic or complex wound that are associated with considerable cost to patients and to healthcare providers.Primary wound contact dressings are usually applied beneath compression devices with the aim of aiding healing. Foam dressings are used frequently, and a variety of foam products is available on the market. The evidence base to guide dressing choice, however, is sparse. To determine the effects of foam dressings on the healing of venous leg ulcers. In October 2012 we searched The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (The Cochrane Library); the Economic Evaluation Database (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; EBSCO CINAHL. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication. We included published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of any type of foam dressing in the treatment of venous ulcers. Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Meta-analysis was undertaken when deemed feasible and appropriate. Twelve RCTs (1023 participants) reporting 14 comparisons were included in this review. There was no difference in healing outcomes between hydrocellular foam dressings and polyurethane foam dressings (three RCTs). Pooled data across five RCTs (418 participants) showed no statistically significant difference between foam dressings and hydrocolloid dressings in the proportion of ulcers healed at 12 to 16 weeks (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.22). No statistically significant between-group differences in healing outcomes were detected when foam dressings were compared with: paraffin gauze (two RCTs); hydrocapillary dressing (one RCT); knitted viscose dressing (one RCT); and protease modulating matrix (one RCT). No statistically significant between-group differences in the proportion of participants experiencing adverse events were detected when hydrocellular foam dressings were compared with polyurethane foam dressings, or when foam dressings were compared with hydrocapillary, hydrocolloid, or knitted viscose dressings (one RCT for each comparison). Six RCTs were considered as being at overall high risk of bias, and the remaining six RCTs were considered to be at overall unclear risk of bias. No included RCT had an overall low risk of bias. The current evidence base does not suggest that foam dressings are more effective in the healing of venous leg ulcers than other wound dressing treatments. The evidence in this area is of low quality.Further evidence is required from well-designed and rigorously-conducted RCTs, that employ methods to minimise bias and report them clearly, before any definitive conclusions can be made regarding the efficacy of foam dressings in the management of venous leg ulcers.

Human Fibroblast-Derived Dermal Substitute

To gain experience in the use of Dermagraft (Advanced Biohealing Inc, La Jolla, California), a human fibroblast-derived dermal substitute (HFDS), for the treatment of nonhealing diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). An open label, noncontrolled, multicenter clinical trial of HFDS in the treatment of DFU was conducted. Subjects with DFUs underwent sharp debridement of the study ulcer and were prescribed an off-loading device. All of the subjects enrolled received applications of HFDS, beginning at day 0 and applied weekly thereafter, along with saline gauze or polyurethane foam dressings from day 0 to week 20. A maximum of 8 HFDS applications was allowed. The primary and secondary end points of the study were complete wound closure by weeks 12 and 20, respectively. A total of 23 centers screened 91 subjects, and 18 centers enrolled an intent-to-treat (ITT) population of 62 subjects. For the ITT population, 27 (44%) subjects healed by week 12, and 32 (52%) healed by week 20. Fifty-one subjects (82%) completed the study to week 12, and 46 subjects (74%) completed the entire 20-week study; wound closure rates in these groups were 59% and 70%, respectively. Median time to healing was 13 weeks. The overall incidence of at least 1 adverse event (44%, 27/62) was typical for this subject population. No adverse events were attributable to HFDS. Data from this study support the safety and efficacy of HFDS in the treatment of nonhealing DFUs.

Actual procedures of diagnostics and treatments of crural venous ulcer in specialized German praxis and clinics

Summary Background: To evaluate the implementation of the guidelines of the German Society of Phlebology for venous crural ulcer a survey was conducted during the annual meeting of the German Society of Phlebology 2008 in Bochum. Methods: All 719 medical participants got an anonymized questionnaire asking for supply of crural ulcer in their institution. Results: The recurrent 66 questionnaires (9.2%) were filled by colleagues from practice or hospital, mostly surgeons, dermatologists, phlebologists and vascular surgeons. As basic diagnostics vein doppler (56.1%), duplex (75.8%) or measurement of brachial-ankleindex (83.3%) were performed. Compression therapy is used in all institutions. Mainly used wound dressings are polyurethane foam dressings, alginates, hydrocolloids and silver dressings. About 2/3 conduct surgical therapy of ulcers. Conclusion: Supply of ulcus cruris by the participants of the annual meeting of the DGP corresponds mainly, but not in all aspects to the guidelines. Further efforts for a spread of the guidelines are necessary.

AN OUTCOMES TRACKING EVALUATION TO ASSESS PRODUCT PERFORMANCE AND PATIENT ACCEPTABILITY OF A NEW AND IMPROVED RANGE OF ABSORBENT POLYURETHANE FOAM DRESSINGS* IN A VARIETY OF FOOT AND ANKLE POSTSURGICAL INCISIONS

Scientific and Clinical Abstracts From the 40th Annual Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Annual Conference: Orlando, Florida: June 21–25, 2008: Case Study Abstracts: Wound-Product Selection and Innovations

Compression stockings and non-continuous use of polyurethane foam dressings for the treatment of venous ulceration. A pilot study.

Venous ulceration is usually treated with Unna's boot. Recently another product, Ulcer-care, has been developed to treat these ulcers. To evaluate the therapeutic value of Ulcer-care. Over 24 months, 20 ambulatory patients with 30 lower extremity stasis ulcers were treated with a product consisting of: 1) a hydrophilic polyurethane sponge covered by a hydrophobic membrane changed daily or every other day; 2) an inner liner stocking that applies 10 mmHg pressure and is worn 24 hours a day; and 3) a surgical stocking with a posterior zipper that applies 30 mmHg graduated pressure and is removed at night. All ulcers healed after 2 to 30 weeks (mean 8.3 weeks) including 15 previously treated by Unna's boot or hydrocolloid dressings and 3 infected ulcers. The Ulcer care treatment for stasis ulcers is highly successful, easy to use, and well accepted by patients.

Unna's Boot vs Polyurethane Foam Dressings for the Treatment of Venous Ulceration

Recent reports have suggested that polyurethane foam dressings provide a more rapid and comfortable healing of venous stasis cutaneous ulcerations than standard semirigid impregnated gauze dressings. This multi-institutional study consists of a randomized, prospective comparison of 36 consecutive patients who were treated with either polyurethane foam dressings (group 1, n = 17) or Unna's boot (group 2, n = 19) for venous ulceration of the lower extremities. Ulcer size ranged from 6.0 to 270 cm2 (mean, 32.2 cm2) for group 1 and 0.2 to 600 cm2 (mean, 76.0 cm2) for group 2. Nine (52.9%) of 17 group 1 patients withdrew from the study due to wound odor, while there was 100% compliance in group 2. Overall wound healing was superior in group 2 (18 [94.7%] of 19) as compared with group 1 (7 [41.2%] of 17) (chi 2 = 8.2). The rate of healing was also better in group 2 (0.5 cm2/d) than in group 1 (0.07 cm2/d). Contrary to published European trials, impregnated gauze dressings exhibited superior treatment results when compared with polyurethane foam dressings in the current study.