Comparative evaluation of topical antiseptic/antimicrobial treatment on aspects of wound repair in the porcine model

Wounds

Volumn 14, Issue 6 SUPPL., 2002, Pages 14-19

  Nanney, Lillian B ^a   Bennett, Laura L ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACETIC ACID; ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; HYDROGEN PEROXIDE; HYPOCHLORITE SODIUM; MAFENIDE ACETATE; POVIDONE IODINE; MAFENIDE; TOPICAL ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT;

ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; BIOAVAILABILITY; BIODIVERSITY; CELL TYPE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENDOTHELIUM CELL; EVALUATION; IN VITRO STUDY; MEDICAL LITERATURE; NONHUMAN; TOPICAL TREATMENT; WOUND; WOUND HEALING; ANIMAL; DRUG EFFECT; RANDOMIZATION; SWINE;

ACETIC ACID; ANIMALS; ANTI-INFECTIVE AGENTS, LOCAL; HYDROGEN PEROXIDE; MAFENIDE; POVIDONE-IODINE; RANDOM ALLOCATION; SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE; SWINE; WOUND HEALING;

EID: 0036728724     PISSN: 10447946     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Lineaweaver W, McMorris S, Soucy D, Howard R. Cellular and bacterial toxicities of topical antiseptic. Plast Reconstr Surg 1985;75:394-6.
2. McKenna PJ, Lehr GS, Leist P, Welling RE. Antiseptic effectiveness with fibroblast preservation. Ann Plast Surg 1991;27:265-8.
3. Kozol RA, Gillies C, Elgebaly SA. Effects of sodium hypochlorite (Dakin's solution) on cells of the wound module. Arch Surg 1988;123:420-3.
4. Wang J, Olson M, Reno C, Wright J, Hart D. The pig as a model for excisional skin healing: Characterization of the molecular and cellular biology and bacteriology of the healing process. Comp Med 2001;51:341-48.
5. Nanney LB. Epidermal and dermal effects of epidermal growth factor during wound repair. J Invest Dermatol 1990;94:624-9.
6. Schaffer CJ, Reinisch L, Polis SL, Stricklin GP, Nanney LB. Comparisons of wound healing among excisional, laser created, and standard thermal burns in porcine wounds of equal depth. Wound Repair Regen 1997;5:52-61.
7. Lo A KM. The use of Mepitel in three children requiring contracture release and skin grafts following second degree burns. Goteborg, Sweden: Molnlycke, 1997.
8. Platt AJ, Phipps A, Judkins K. A comparative study of silicone net dressings and paraffin gauze dressing in skin-grafted sites. Burns 1996;22(7):543-5.
9. Roesel JF, Nanney LB. Assessment of differential cytokine effects on neovascularization using an in vivo model of cutaneous wound repair. J Surg Res 1995;58:449-59.
10. Bennett LL, Rosenblum R, Perlov C, Davidson JM, Barton RM, Nanney LB. An in vivo comparison of topical agents on wound repair. Plast Reconst Surg 2001;108:675-83.
11. Nanney LB, Paulsen S, Davidson M, Cardwell NL, Whitsitt JS, Davidson JM. Boosting of EGF receptors by gene gun stimulates epidermal growth in vivo. Wound Rep Regen 2000;8:117-27.
12. Nanney LB, Wamil BD, Whitsitt J, Cardwell JL, Davidson JM, Hellerqvist CG. CM101 accelerates resurfacing by decreasing formation of pathogenic capillaries and blood flow during cutaneous wound repair. Angiogenesis 2001;4:61-70.
13. Smoot EC, Kucan JO, Roth A, Mody N, Debs N. In vitro toxicity testing for antibacterials against human keratinocytes. Plast Reconstr Surg 1991;87:917-24.
14. Bellinger GC, Conway H. Effects of silver nitrate and Sulfamylon on epithelial regeneration. Plast Reconstr Surg 1970;45:585.
15. Maggi SP, Soler PM, Smith PD, Hill DP, Ko F, Robson MC. The efficacy of 5% Sulfamylon solution for the treatment of contaminated explanted human meshed skin grafts. Burns 1999;25:237-41.
16. Kjolseth D, Frank JM, Barker JH, et al. Comparison of the effects of commonly used wound agents on epithelialization and neovascularization. J Am Coll Surg 1994;179:305-12.
17. Argamaso RV, Garcia A, Freiman M, et al. Effect of Sulfamylon acetate on wound healing. Plast Reconstr Surg 1970;46:282-6.
18. Kucan JO, Smoot EC. Five percent mafenide acetate solution in the treatment of thermal injuries. J Burn Care Rehab 1993;14:158-63.
19. Mendelson JA. The management of burns under conditions of limited resources using topical aqueous Sulfamylon (mafenide) hydrochloride spray. J Burn Care Rehab 1997;18:238-44.
20. Lineaweaver WC, Howard R, Soucy D, et al. Topical antimicrobial toxicity. Arch Surg 1985;120:267-70.
21. Boyce ST, Supp AP, Swope VB, Warden GD. Topical Sulfamylon reduces engraftment of cultured skin substitutes on athymic mice. J Burn Care Rehab 1999;20:33-6.
22. Yin HO, Langford R, Burrell RE. Comparative evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of ACTICOAT antimicrobial barrier dressing. J Burn Care Rehab 1999;20:195-200.
23. Custer J, Edlich RF, Prusak M, Madden J, Panek P, Wangensteen OH. Studies in the management of the contaminated wound V. An assessment of the effectiveness of the pHisoHex and betadine surgical scrub solutions. Am J Surg 1971;121:572-5.
24. Brennan SS, Leaper DJ. The effect of antiseptics on the healing wound: A study using the rabbit ear chamber. Br J Surg 1985;72:780-2.
25. Kramer SA. Effect of povidone-iodine on wound healing: A review. J Vasc Nursing 1999;17:17-23.
26. Heggers JP, Sazy JA, Stenberg BD, et al. Bactericidal and wound-healing properties of sodium hypochlorite solutions: The 1991 Lindeberg Award. J Burn Care Rehab 1991;12:420-4.
27. Cotter JL, Fader RC, Lilley C, Herndon DN. Chemical parameters, antiseptic activities, and tissue toxicity of 0.1 and 0.5% sodium hypochlorite solutions. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1985;28:118-22.