115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29931082)
1. The Effective Duration of Antimicrobial Activity of Mafenide Acetate After Reconstitution.
Afshari A; Nguyen L; Kahn SA; Montgomery AC; Shinha T; Stratton C; Summitt B
J Burn Care Res; 2018 Aug; 39(5):736-738. PubMed ID: 29931082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Hydrofiber Dressing Saturated With Mafenide Acetate Extends the Duration of Antimicrobial Activity.
Kahn SA; Afshari A; Nguyen L; Shinha T; Huff T; Montgomery AC; Stratton C; Summitt B
J Burn Care Res; 2017; 38(4):e704-e707. PubMed ID: 27775984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Thermal stability of mafenide and amphotericin B topical solution.
Rizzo JA; Martini AK; Pruskowski KA; Rowan MP; Niece KL; Akers KS
Burns; 2018 Mar; 44(2):475-480. PubMed ID: 28935221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [In-vitro efficacy of topical antibiotics on bacteria from burns].
Baars B; Opferkuch W; Müller FE
Fortschr Med; 1980 Mar; 98(11):400-2. PubMed ID: 6768661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 2.5% Mafenide Acetate: A Cost-Effective Alternative to the 5% Solution for Burn Wounds.
Afshari A; Nguyen L; Kahn SA; Summitt B
J Burn Care Res; 2017; 38(1):e42-e47. PubMed ID: 27606553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Susceptibility of Pseudomonas and Staphylococcus wound isolates to topical antimicrobial agents: a 10-year review and clinical evaluation.
Thomson PD; Taddonio TE; Tait MJ; Prasad JK
Burns; 1989 Jun; 15(3):190-2. PubMed ID: 2503000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The effect of 5% mafenide acetate solution on bacterial control in infected rat burns.
Murphy RC; Kucan JO; Robson MC; Heggers JP
J Trauma; 1983 Oct; 23(10):878-81. PubMed ID: 6415293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparative evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of ACTICOAT antimicrobial barrier dressing.
Yin HQ; Langford R; Burrell RE
J Burn Care Rehabil; 1999; 20(3):195-200. PubMed ID: 10342470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Silvazine (silver sulfadiazine and chlorhexidine) activity against 200 clinical isolates.
George N; Faoagali J; Muller M
Burns; 1997 Sep; 23(6):493-5. PubMed ID: 9429028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. In vitro penetration of topical antiseptics through eschar of burn patients.
Stefanides MM; Copeland CE; Kominos SD; Yee RB
Ann Surg; 1976 Apr; 183(4):358-64. PubMed ID: 1267492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison between topical honey and mafenide acetate in treatment of auricular burn.
Hashemi B; Bayat A; Kazemei T; Azarpira N
Am J Otolaryngol; 2011; 32(1):28-31. PubMed ID: 20015812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. In vitro antimicrobial activity of a new ophthalmic solution containing povidone-iodine 0.6% (IODIM
Pinna A; Donadu MG; Usai D; Dore S; D'Amico-Ricci G; Boscia F; Zanetti S
Acta Ophthalmol; 2020 Mar; 98(2):e178-e180. PubMed ID: 31486592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The antimicrobial spectrum of Xeroform
Barillo DJ; Barillo AR; Korn S; Lam K; Attar PS
Burns; 2017 Sep; 43(6):1189-1194. PubMed ID: 28641915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Controlling methicillin resistant Staphyloccocus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa wound infections with a novel biomaterial.
Martineau L; Davis SC; Peng HT; Hung A
J Invest Surg; 2007; 20(4):217-27. PubMed ID: 17710602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Does the addition of nystatin to 5% mafenide acetate and genitourinary irrigant solutions interfere with their antimicrobial activity? Assessment by two topical antimicrobial test assay systems.
Holder IA; Neely AN
J Burn Care Rehabil; 2001; 22(4):282-7. PubMed ID: 11482688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Sensibility assay for topical agents. A new method.
Lorenti AS; Bensadon-Carbonell JM; Benaim F
J Burn Care Rehabil; 1989; 10(3):209-12. PubMed ID: 2501310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. In vitro susceptibility testing of topical antimicrobial agents used in pediatric burn patients: comparison of two methods.
Rodgers GL; Mortensen JE; Fisher MC; Long SS
J Burn Care Rehabil; 1997; 18(5):406-10. PubMed ID: 9313120
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Management of bioburden with a burn gel that targets nociceptors.
Martineau L; Dosch HM
J Wound Care; 2007 Apr; 16(4):157-64. PubMed ID: 17444381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A simple cost-saving measure: 2.5% mafenide acetate solution.
Ibrahim A; Fagan S; Keaney T; Sarhane KA; Hursey DA; Chang P; Sheridan R; Ryan C; Tompkins R; Goverman J
J Burn Care Res; 2014; 35(4):349-53. PubMed ID: 24043238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The effects of topical mafenide acetate application on skin graft survival in bacterial contaminated wounds.
Baver Acaban M; Sarı A; Demirbağ HO; Ersöz G; Aktaş S
Burns; 2024 Mar; 50(2):433-443. PubMed ID: 37985270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
