Home Print this page Email this page Users Online: 753
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 26  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 29-37

Nanocrystalline silver gel versus conventional silver sulfadiazine cream as topical dressing for second-degree burn wound: A clinicopathological comparison


1 Department of Plastic Surgery, R G Kar Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
2 Department of Pathology, Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
3 Department of Plastic Surgery, Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
4 Department of Plastic Surgery, Calcutta National Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Date of Web Publication11-Mar-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Gouranga Dutta
113 Ashutosh Road, Ward No. 1, P.O. Mathabhanga, Coochbehar - 736 146, West Bengal
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijb.ijb_9_18

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Background: The use of topical chemotherapy is fundamental to prevent infections thereby reducing local inflammation, pain and early healing in superficial, and deep dermal burns. Among the whole gamut, choice of topical agents became an important decisive factor. Silver sulfadiazine (SSD) cream has been an important part of burns management for many years. The major complications attributed to silver compounds are due to the complex or anion sulfadiazine, not the silver itself. With better understanding of the physical and chemical properties, nanocrystalline silver particles have emerged as the most studied material for burn wound dressing recently. Having in mind the difficulties experienced, the aim of the present study is to compare SSD with nanosilver (nano-Ag) gel dressing to treat second-degree burn wounds.
Materials and Methods: Over a period of 24 months, a total of 90 cases were studied. 45 patients randomly included in each group, further divided into two subgroups depending on depth (superficial and deep) and involvement of total body surface area (10%–20% and >20%–30%) to minimize bias. Clinical, microbiological, and histological parameters were analyzed.
Results: In NS group, significantly less pain observed throughout the study period in both superficial and deep dermal burn patient. Pseudomonas was the predominant flora. Nano-Ag gel was effective in controlling most of the microorganisms except Klebsiella and Proteus sp. Healthy granulation tissue appeared faster (P = 0.0009) in deep dermal burns in nano-Ag group and confirmed histologically. Overall wound healing was more satisfactory in nano-Ag group for both superficial and deep dermal wounds, clinically as well as by histological examination.
Conclusions: Clinical and histological studies showed that nano-Ag gel has a positive impact on overall healing process of the patients and proved more beneficial for the management of partial thickness burn as compared to SSD.

Keywords: Burn wound dressing, histological study, nanosilver gel, silver sulfadiazine cream


How to cite this article:
Dutta G, Das N, Adhya A, Munian K, Majumdar BK. Nanocrystalline silver gel versus conventional silver sulfadiazine cream as topical dressing for second-degree burn wound: A clinicopathological comparison. Indian J Burns 2018;26:29-37

How to cite this URL:
Dutta G, Das N, Adhya A, Munian K, Majumdar BK. Nanocrystalline silver gel versus conventional silver sulfadiazine cream as topical dressing for second-degree burn wound: A clinicopathological comparison. Indian J Burns [serial online] 2018 [cited 2019 Jul 21];26:29-37. Available from: http://www.ijburns.com/text.asp?2018/26/1/29/253861




  Introduction Top


Burns is a global public health problem, accounting for an estimated 180,000 deaths annually. The majority of these occur in low- and middle-income countries and almost two-thirds occur in the WHO African and Southeast Asia Region. Over 10 lakh people are moderately or severely burnt every year in India.[1] Second degree or partial thickness burn patients are targeted as nonfatal burns are the leading cause of morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. Burns are among the leading causes of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) lost in low-income and middle-income countries. Apart from the cost of treatment indirect costs, such as lost wages, prolonged care for scars and deformities, emotional trauma, and commitment of family resources, also contribute to the socioeconomic impact.

The final aim of burn management and therapy is to minimize pain and thereby reducing the chance of anxiety and depression,[2] to prevent infection, to promote early epithelialization as well as healing of wound and betterment of functional and esthetic after effects. The use of topical agent has been fundamental in that regard and has helped to improve the survival of patients with major burns and to minimize the incidence of burn wound sepsis, a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in these patients. One of the strategies that have gained attention is the use of noble metal antimicrobials, the most prevalent of which is silver. The delivery systems available, often in the form of a salt, have been the limiting factor to the successful biological use of this noble metal.

Over the past 40 years, silver sulfadiazine (SSD) has become a very popular antimicrobial silver delivery system. All kinds of combinations of sulfa drugs with silver were tested in vitro, but SSD appeared to be the most effective [3] and therefore used as a conventional dressing agent in burn wounds. However, development of bacterial resistance and impaired reepithelialization has been described. Bone marrow toxicity observed with SSDs primarily due to the propylene glycol component. Other side effects include argyria, hepatic, and renal toxicity.[4],[5],[6],[7] These adverse effects demand a new therapy options for better burn wound management.

Advances in the field of nanotechnology helped us to provide a new form of silver delivery system and have markedly improved the biologic value of silver. Nanosilver particles have no local or systemic toxicity and do not impair healing. Smaller the particle size of silver, greater contact with wound surface area, thus increasing bioactivity and silver solubility. These advances in crystal chemistry will likely have a dramatic impact on the microbiology, as well as the biology of wound healing and control of inflammation.

The aim of this study is to compare the overall effect (clinical, microbiological, and histological) of topical application of 1% SSD and nanocrystalline silver gel dressing in second-degree burn patients.


  Materials and Methods Top


The study was carried out in a tertiary care burn unit, in Kolkata, from January 2013 to December 2014. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee. A total of 90 patients aged between 10 and 60 years were selected for the study. 45 patients assigned for each nanocrystalline-silver (nano-Ag) and 1% SSD group randomly.

Inclusion criteria – Patients with second-degree thermal burn injury involving 10%–30% of the total body surface area (TBSA) involvement attending within 24 h and those patients who gave an informed consent. Exclusion criteria – Patients who refused to participate in the study or not fulfilling the inclusion criteria, pregnants, or those suffering from other medical illnesses.

In outpatient department or after hospitalization, patients are subjected to clinical assessments regarding degree [8],[9],[10] and extent of burn. Written informed consent obtained and clinical photographs taken from those who meet the inclusion criteria. Initial burn management was started according to the principles of ABCDEF – It denotes A-Airway control, B-Breathing, C-Circulation, D-Neurological Disability, E-Environment control, F-Fluid Resuscitation.[11]

As the wound healing time, depends on TBSA burnt and depth of tissue injury, we distributed the patients in two groups on TBSA burnt (10%-20% and >20%-30%). We further divided them into subgroups on depth of involvement (second-degree superficial and deep dermal burn).

After exposing the burn wound, the involved and its adjacent area washed properly with normal saline to remove all dirt, soot, debris, following which all blisters were deroofed, dead epithelium was removed as far as possible. Now, a dilute povidone-iodine solution was applied and finally, washed again with sterile normal saline solution. Having selected randomly SSD cream and nano-Ag gel applied over the control group and test group, respectively. We assumed all acute burn wound are sterile. Systemic broad-spectrum antibiotics given to all on day 0 and changed according to pus culture report which was sent on 3rd postadmission day; bacterial culture and sensitivity determinations were made from the swabs taken from the surface of the wounds; hemoglobin, nutrition, hydration, and dyselectrolytemia was corrected, and hence, optimization of internal environment and external environment kept equal for all patients.

Nano-Ag gel applied in the test group and covered by sterile gauze (inner layer), and gamjee (outer layer) and dressings were changed every alternate day until the wound is healed. SSD cream was applied in the control group and then covered with sterile dressing, and the frequency of dressing change was kept the same for the two groups until the wound was healed. The involved and surrounding area of wound was photographed at regular interval.

A histological study was done only in deep dermal burn cases, as these wounds granulates and heals with scarring. Only, clinically deep dermal burn patients were biopsied on day 3 of burn injury, for the proper assessment of depth of injury. Initially, by clinical estimation of depth, biopsy was done in 59 patients, of those only 48 cases who fulfilled the criteria of deep dermal burn were included (SSD and nano-Ag applied in 25 and 23 patients, respectively) for further histological study. Tissues were also taken on day 15, from granulation tissue and after 12 weeks, from the healed wound in both the groups. All tissues were taken under local anesthesia. Biopsies were taken from at least three representative areas of the wound surface to include 3 mm depth of the wound and a 3 mm area of normal skin. All of them were fixed in buffered formalin, sectioned, and stained with hematoxylin and eosin.[12] The sections were viewed and photographed at ×40, ×100, and ×400 magnifications.

Following parameters are evaluated to assess the efficacy of nano-Ag gel dressing over SSD cream dressing:

  • Pain perception assessed using visual analog scale [13] on day 7, 14, and 21
  • Assessment of microbial flora
  • Antimicrobial efficacy of the agents to prevent colonization
  • Degree of wound discharge (Amount of exudates)
  • Appearance of healthy granulation for deep dermal burn
  • 50% reepithelialization and probability of complete reepithelialization by 2 and 4 weeks depending on the depth of burn
  • Actual duration of wound healing
  • Histological assessment.


The study was a prospective study. Sample randomization was done by computer software. SSD 1% cream used was supplied by hospital store. Nano-Ag gel was prepared aseptically and packed in sterile container [Figure 1] in the departmental laboratory.[14]
Figure 1: Nano-Ag gel with container as prepared in the departmental laboratory

Click here to view


All the data gathered summarized and statistical analysis has been done by GraphPad Prism version 5 (Developer: GraphPad Software, Inc., California, USA). The analysis was two-tailed and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


  Results Top


A total of 90 patients were recruited for the study purpose. Demographic and average age distribution of the patients for the study is depicted in [Table 1] and [Table 2], respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between both the groups in respect of age, gender, and extent of TBSA involvement.
Table 1: Demographic distribution in both the groups

Click here to view
Table 2: Average age distribution in patients in all subgroups

Click here to view


The intensity of pain is observed more in the cases of deep dermal burns and in initial week. Results were compared using two-way ANOVA test which showed the intensity of pain felt is significantly lesser in nano-Ag group than in patients of SSD dressing group throughout 1st, 2nd and 3rd week in both superficial [Figure 2]a and deep dermal burn patients [Figure 2]b.
Figure 2: (a) Bar diagram showing comparison of average pain score and P < 0.05 in superficial dermal burn on 7th, 14th, and 21st days (two-way ANOVA test). (b) Bar diagram showing comparison of average pain score and P < 0.05 in deep dermal burn on 7th, 14th, and 21st days (two-way ANOVA test)

Click here to view


In superficial dermal burn patients, majority of the patients had small amount of exudates, whereas none of them had heavy exudates. However, in deep dermal group, 13 patients (52%) in the SSD group had heavy exudates whereas similar percentage in the nano-Ag group had small exudates [Table 3].
Table 3: Amount of exudates is compared in this table in both dressing groups

Click here to view


Out of 90 patients, 48 were culture positive and mostly in deep dermal burns. Nano-Ag group showed less number of culture-positive cases, and it is statistically significant (P = 0.0369) as shown in [Table 4]. Among 48 positive cases, 84 colonies were present. More than 50% of cases are positive for Pseudomonas. [Figure 3] shows all types of microorganisms are more effectively killed in nano-Ag group compared to the SSD group except for Klebsiella and Proteus.
Table 4: Distribution of cases according to culture report

Click here to view
Figure 3: Using a bar diagram, distribution of the microorganisms and effectiveness of both the dressing compared for each organism

Click here to view


Usually, superficial dermal burn does not need the formation of granulation for healing unless complicated by patients immunity profile. The appearance of healthy granulation tissue in respect of days was only studied in deep dermal burns and showed significant less time (P = 0.0009) in nano-Ag group (21.69 ± 7.16) compared to SSD (29.80 ± 9.04) [Figure 4].
Figure 4: Scatter diagram showing distribution of the patients according to number of days to appear healthy granulation tissue in both arms. Mean and standard deviation shown with horizontal bars (blue: nanosilver, rver sulfadiazine)

Click here to view


In deep dermal burn, statistically significant number of patients in nano-Ag group achieved 50% epithelialization by 4 weeks (P = 0.020), on the other hand, majority of the patients could not achieve complete epithelialization by 4 weeks in both study arms and are not statistically significant (P = 0.06) [Table 5]. When Log-ranked, Kaplan–Meier plots depict [Figure 5] statistically significant result in the time trend (in the two study arms) toward the probability of 50% epithelialization (P = 0.0018) and probability of complete epithelialization (P = 0.0380).
Table 5: Comparison of the proportion of deep dermal burn cases showing 50% and complete epithelization by 4 weeks

Click here to view
Figure 5: Kaplan–Meier plots depicting the time trend toward achieving 50% and complete healing for deep dermal burns

Click here to view


Similarly, in superficial dermal burn patients, 50% epithelization (P = 0.055) and complete epithelization (P = 0.190) in 2 weeks assessed and it is found that majority of these patients could not achieve complete epithelization by 2 weeks in both the study groups [Table 6]. When log-ranked, Kaplan–Meier plots depict statistically significant result in the time trend (in the two study arms) toward the probability of 50% epithelialization (P = 0.0221); however, the probability of complete epithelialization (P = 0.101) was not significant statistically.
Table 6: Comparison of the proportion of superficial dermal burn cases showing 50% and complete epithelization by 2 weeks

Click here to view


As depicted in [Table 7], complete wound healing time was less in nano-Ag group be it deep dermal or superficial dermal. However, statistically significant results obtained only in deep dermal burns in both 10%–20% TBSA (P = 0.024) group and >20%–30% TBSA (P = 0.029) group. Photographs of a patient with deep dermal burn treated with nano-Ag gel dressing in various stages of wound healing as shown in [Figure 6]a, [Figure 6]b, [Figure 6]c.
Table 7: Depicting average days to achieve healing in both the groups

Click here to view
Figure 6: (a) Deep dermal burn involving ankle and dorsum of the foot on the 2nd day after allocation for nanosilver gel dressing, (b) On day 16th showing healthy granulation tissue with areas of epithelialization in the periphery. (c) Complete epithelialization as photographed on day 29th with complete wound healing in peripheral areas of the involved foot

Click here to view


Histopathology findings

On day 3, the biopsied tissue from both the groups showed acute inflammatory exudate intermixed with necrotic debris and red blood cells up to the papillary dermis or both papillary and reticular dermis (depth assessment). On day 15, majority of the samples in the nano-Ag group showed the presence of well-formed granulation tissue without stromal edema, and acute inflammatory cell infiltrate whereas the SSD group showed the presence of both [Figure 7] and [Figure 8]. At the margin of the wound, partial epithelialization was observed in few specimens of nano-Ag group. The nano-Ag group in 12 weeks showed complete epithelialization with normal maturation, normal vascularization in the papillary dermis, and preservation of dermal appendages in varying amount with minimal inflammatory cell infiltration. The SSD group also showed complete healing at 12 weeks with predominantly hyperplastic overlying epidermis, underlying fibrovascular dermal stroma with deposition of thin fibrillary collagen in the papillary and reticular dermis [Figure 9] and [Figure 10]. These histological findings corroborate well with clinical assessment.
Figure 7: Fifteenth day after silver sulfadiazine treatment showing granulation tissue composed of proliferated capillary blood vessels, fibroblasts and mixed inflammatory cell infiltrates comprising of lymphocytes, plasma cells, eosinophils, and neutrophils. The stroma is edematous (H and E, ×400)

Click here to view
Figure 8: Fifteenth day of nanosilver gel dressing shows granulation tissue composed of proliferated capillaries, fibroblasts, and chronic inflammatory cells (H and E, ×400)

Click here to view
Figure 9: After treatment with silver sulfadiazine, at the end of 12 weeks showing hyperplastic squamous epithelium, scarring of the papillary dermis with deposition of fibrillary collagen of regular thickness (H and E, ×100)

Click here to view
Figure 10: After treatment with nanosilver gel dressing, at the end of 12 weeks showing complete wound healing with normal epithelialization and keratinization of overlying stratified squamous epithelium and underlying fibrocollagenous stroma with few dermal appendages. Inflammation is minimum (H and E, ×40)

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


Silver as a topical antimicrobial agent has been used for many centuries. A wide range of wound dressings that contain elemental silver or a silver-releasing compound has been developed for primary burn management. Dr. Charles Fox introduced SSD cream in 1970,[15] and since then has been an important part of burns management. Among all kinds of sulfa drugs combinations with silver, silver sulfadiazine emerged as [3] the “gold standard” topical agent for burn wounds.[16] This silver complex acts on the bacterial wall, and its effectiveness can be explained by the relatively strong bonding of silver sulfadiazine to DNA [17] which differs from that of silver nitrate or other silver salts.[17],[18] However, the use of silver dressings in wound care has recently been faced with considerable challenges as it may slow the process of healing [19] can develop bacterial resistance [20],[21],[22] and has been reported with bone marrow toxicity.

With the advent of nanotechnology (“nano” signifies one-billionth [10−9]) perhaps the most unique form of silver developed for wound dressings is nanocrystalline silver, which differs in both physical and chemical properties from microcrystalline or macrocrystalline silver and from silver salts.[23] This is, in part, related to the increase in grain boundary atoms as a percentage of the total atoms in the material, which is due to the small crystal size. These grain boundaries, according to Birringer,[24] may represent a third state of solid matter. There is a marked increase in surface area for water to reaction with silver in the nanocrystalline form. High surface-to-volume ratio makes silver nanoparticles more effective even at very low concentration, thus reduces the chance of toxicity. Nanocrystalline silver is a metastable, high-energy form of elemental silver. Normal silver placed in water will not dissolve, but nanocrystalline silver in aqueous system may exist in both Ag + and/or Ag 0 forms, whereas other silver sources release only Ag +.[23],[25],[26] The nature of the solute also affects the biological activity of silver. In complex organic biological fluids, continuous concentrations of silver >50 ppm and as high as 60.5 ppm [20] are needed to kill microbes. This difference in the dissolution properties of nanocrystalline silver dressings appears to alter the biological character of the solution including both antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory activities.[23] When the ions in the dressing-wound bed interface are depleted, the equilibrium shifts and more Ag + ion and Ag 0 are released, thus producing a sustained, steady supply of active silver.[27]

Moreover, the use of SSD cream results in the formation of a pseudoeschar and can withdraw fluid from this wound surface. Whereas, nanocrystalline silver delivery maintains moisture layer on the wound surface. Advantages of a moist wound dressing include decrease in surface desiccation and eschar formation, increase in local growth factor production, activation of surface proteases to remove devitalized tissue, decreased surface inflammation, enhanced wound surface immune defenses, increased rate of angiogenesis and fibroblast proliferation, increased proliferation, and migration of epithelial cells along thin water layer.

Typically, the wound repair process involves steps that include inflammation around the site of injury, angiogenesis and the development of granulation tissue, repair of the connective tissue and epithelium, and ultimately remodeling that leads to a healed wound. One event that impedes wound healing is colonization of the wound bed by microorganisms.[28],[29] In addition to the production of a variety of toxins and proteases, the presence of microorganisms in a wound bed may also lead to a prolonged inflammatory response. The host inflammatory response is remarkably effective at eliminating the invading microbial population, but that same process, over time, may also damage the surrounding tissues.[28] This is evidenced by the fact that wounds associated with a heavy bacterial burden often show healing failure.[30]

Nanocrystalline silver dressings have been demonstrated as effective antifungal agents,[31] have a broad antibacterial effect on a range of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria and antibiotic-resistant bacteria strains,[32] thus decrease the incidence of infections that delay wound healing.[31] It also has anti-inflammatory effects [30] (reduced local matrix metalloproteinase levels and enhanced cellular apoptosis)[33] on wounds and facilitating the early phases of wound healing. Our study also reflects decrease colonization, acceleration of re-epithelialization, and thus reduction of wound healing time corresponding to other studies [14],[34],[35],[36] and thus indirect evidence of anti-inflammatory effect of nano-Ag dressing.

Pain remains the primary concern to the burn patient which is associated with initial injury and necessary daily care (procedural pain) that follows and remains largely been undertreated.[37],[38],[39] In this study, we found that nano-Ag gel is a better alternative as dressing material regarding relieving pain.

In this study, we did not come across any kind of clinically detectable adverse effects in both the groups.

The histological study revealed that pathological process in each of the subgroups was similar but the time frame differs. Nano-Ag gel dressing group achieved early and quick transition of the healing cycle as compared to SSD dressing group owing to decrease microbial load, attenuating inflammatory process. Moreover, clinically, it is seen that prolonged conservative treatment with SSD longer than 3 weeks, especially in younger age group, usually results in healing with hypertrophic or atrophic scars.[17],[40] In this study, we found that the final esthetic outcome of the healed area is far more superior in nano-Ag gel dressing group and also evidenced by histological study.


  Conclusions Top


In this study, we were able to discover the multifaceted benefits of nanocrystalline silver gel dressings. By eliminating toxic complexes, it decreases pain and reduces bacterial load and thereby local inflammation. It also reduces exudates formation and thereby frequency of pain provoking dressing can be lessened. Overall, it has very much positive effect on wound healing and final outcome, further confirmed by histopathological study. This study reflects that in comparison to SSD, nano-Ag is able to maintain an undisturbed optimum healing environment in second-degree burn wound. Further studies regarding cost effectiveness and long-term follow-up will decide whether it is the appropriate time to consider nano-Ag gel as the “gold standard” dressing material.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
World Health Organization. BURNS Fact Sheet, Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. Available from: http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/burns. [Last updated on 2018 Mar 06; Last accessed on 2018 May 08].  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Van Loey NE, Maas CJ, Faber AW, Taal LA. Predictors of chronic posttraumatic stress symptoms following burn injury: Results of a longitudinal study. J Trauma Stress 2003;16:361-9.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Stanford W, Rappole BW, Fox CL Jr. Clinical experience with silver sulfadiazine, a new topical agent for control of Pseudomonas infections in burns. J Trauma 1969;9:377-88.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Abedini F, Ahmadi A, Yavari A, Hosseini V, Mousavi S. Comparison of silver nylon wound dressing and silver sulfadiazine in partial burn wound therapy. Int Wound J 2013;10:573-8.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Muller MJ, Hollyoak MA, Moaveni Z, Brown TL, Herndon DN, Heggers JP, et al. Retardation of wound healing by silver sulfadiazine is reversed by Aloe vera and nystatin. Burns 2003;29:834-6.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Chaby G, Viseux V, Poulain JF, De Cagny B, Denoeux JP, Lok C, et al. Topical silver sulfadiazine-induced acute renal failure. Ann Dermatol Venereol 2005;132:891-3.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Fraser JF, Cuttle L, Kempf M, Kimble RM. Cytotoxicity of topical antimicrobial agents used in burn wounds in Australasia. ANZ J Surg 2004;74:139-42.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Rajiv S. Achauer and Sood's Burn Surgery Reconstruction and Rehabilitation. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2006.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Barret-Nerin JP, Herndon DN. Principles and Practice of Burn Surgery. 1st ed. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2005.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Duffy BJ, Mclaughlin PM, Eichelberger MR. Assessment, triage, and early management of burns in children. Clin Pediatr Emerg Med 2006;7:82-93.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Hettiaratchy S, Papini R. Initial management of a major burn: I – Overview. BMJ 2004;328:1555-7.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Subrahmanyam M. A prospective randomised clinical and histological study of superficial burn wound healing with honey and silver sulfadiazine. Burns 1998;24:157-61.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Haefeli M, Elfering A. Pain assessment. Eur Spine J 2006;15 Suppl 1:S17-24.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Adhya A, Bain J, Ray O, Hazra A, Adhikari S, Dutta G, et al. Healing of burn wounds by topical treatment: A randomized controlled comparison between silver sulfadiazine and nano-crystalline silver. J Basic Clin Pharm 2014;6:29-34.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Fox CL. Silver sulphadiazine, addendum to local therapy. In: Modern Treatment Hoeber Medical Division. New York: Harper and Row; 1967. p. 1259.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Sheckter CC, Van Vliet MM, Krishnan NM, Garner WL. Cost-effectiveness comparison between topical silver sulfadiazine and enclosed silver dressing for partial-thickness burn treatment. J Burn Care Res 2014;35:284-90.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Klasen HJ. A historical review of the use of silver in the treatment of burns. II. Renewed interest for silver. Burns 2000;26:131-8.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Fox CL, Stanford JW. Anti-bacterial action of silver sulphadiazine and DNA binding. In: Matter P, Barcaly TL, Konı´ova´ Z, editors. Research in Burns. Bern: H. Huber Publishers; 1971. p. 133-8.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Cho Lee AR, Leem H, Lee J, Park KC. Reversal of silver sulfadiazine-impaired wound healing by epidermal growth factor. Biomaterials 2005;26:4670-6.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Maple PA, Hamilton-Miller JM, Brumfitt W. Comparison of the in-vitro activities of the topical antimicrobials azelaic acid, nitrofurazone, silver sulphadiazine and mupirocin against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother 1992;29:661-8.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Hamilton-Miller JM, Shah S, Smith C. Silver sulphadiazine: A comprehensive in vitro reassessment. Chemotherapy 1993;39:405-9.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Vazquez F, Fidalgo S, Mendez FJ, Mendoza MC. Resistance to antibiotics and inorganic ions in virulent bacterial strains from a hospital. J Chemother 1989;1:233-9.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Taylor PL, Ussher AL, Burrell RE. Impact of heat on nanocrystalline silver dressings. Part I: Chemical and biological properties. Biomaterials 2005;26:7221-9.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Birringer R. Nanocrystalline materials. Mater Sci Eng 1989;A117:33-43.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Fu-Ren F, Fan Allen J. Bard chemical, electrochemical, gravimetric, and microscopic studies on antimicrobial silver films. Phys Chem B 2002;106:279-87.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Taylor PL, Omotoso O, Wiskel JB, Mitlin D, Burrell RE. Impact of heat on nanocrystalline silver dressings. Part II: Physical properties. Biomaterials 2005;26:7230-40.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Dunn K, Edwards-Jones V. The role of acticoat with nanocrystalline silver in the management of burns. Burns 2004;30 Suppl 1:S1-9.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Wright JB, Hansen DL, Burrell RE. The comparative efficacy of two antimicrobial barrier dressings:In vitro examination of two controlled release of silver dressings. Wounds 1998;10:179-88.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Robson MC. Wound infection. A failure of wound healing caused by an imbalance of bacteria. Surg Clin North Am 1997;77:637-50.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Warriner R, Burrell R. Infection and the chronic wound: A focus on silver. Adv Skin Wound Care 2005;18 Suppl 1:2-12.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Wright JB, Lam K, Hansen D, Burrell RE. Efficacy of topical silver against fungal burn wound pathogens. Am J Infect Control 1999;27:344-50.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Kim JS, Kuk E, Yu KN, Kim JH, Park SJ, Lee HJ, et al. Antimicrobial effects of silver nanoparticles. Nanomedicine 2007;3:95-101.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Wright JB, Lam K, Buret AG, Olson ME, Burrell RE. Early healing events in a porcine model of contaminated wounds: Effects of nanocrystalline silver on matrix metalloproteinases, cell apoptosis, and healing. Wound Repair Regen 2002;10:141-51.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Poon VK, Burd A.In vitro cytotoxity of silver: Implication for clinical wound care. Burns 2004;30:140-7.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Hollinger MA. Toxicological aspects of topical silver pharmaceuticals. Crit Rev Toxicol 1996;26:255-60.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Stern HS. Silver sulphadiazine and the healing of partial thickness burns: A prospective clinical trial. Br J Plast Surg 1989;42:581-5.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Brown NJ, Rodger S, Ware RS, Kimble RM, Cuttle L. Efficacy of a children's procedural preparation and distraction device on healing in acute burn wound care procedures: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2012;13:238.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Summer GJ, Puntillo KA, Miaskowski C, Green PG, Levine JD. Burn injury pain: The continuing challenge. J Pain 2007;8:533-48.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Honari S, Patterson DR, Gibbons J, Martin-Herz SP, Mann R, Gibran NS, et al. Comparison of pain control medication in three age groups of elderly patients. J Burn Care Rehabil 1997;18:500-4.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Dickinson SJ. Topical therapy of burns in children with silver sulfadiazine. N Y State J Med 1973;73:2045-9.  Back to cited text no. 40
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6], [Figure 7], [Figure 8], [Figure 9], [Figure 10]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6], [Table 7]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusions
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed608    
    Printed34    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded35    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]