These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Evaluation of Topical Off-the-Shelf Therapies to Reduce the Need to Evacuate Battlefield-Injured Warfighters.
    Author: Larson D, Carlsson AH, Valdera FA, Burgess M, Leatherman L, Shaffer L, Christy RJ, Nuutila K.
    Journal: Mil Med; 2024 Jul 03; 189(7-8):1505-1513. PubMed ID: 37776542.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: Immediate evacuation of burn casualties can be challenging in austere environments, and it is predicted to be even more difficult in future multi-domain battlespaces against near-peer foes. Therefore, a need exists to treat burn wounds at the point of injury to protect the exposed injury for an extended period. In this study, we compare two commercially available FDA-approved therapies to the current gold standard of care (GSOC), excisional debridement followed by the application of split-thickness skin graft, and the standard for prolonged field care, silver sulfadiazine (SSD) cream. The shelf-stable therapies evaluated were irradiated human skin (IHS) allograft and polylactic acid (PLA). Our objective was to study whether they have the potential capability to reduce the need for evacuation to a burn center for surgical intervention so that the combat power can be preserved in the field. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen burns (50 cm2) were created on the dorsum of four anesthetized swine. All materials were sterile, but a sterile field was not utilized in order to simulate the prolonged field care setting. The wounds were then treated with PLA, IHS, and SSD cream, and the remaining wounds (designated GSOC) were also treated with SSD cream. On post-operative day (POD) 3, sterile surgical debridement and skin grafting (1:4) were performed on the GSOC wounds. Burn healing was followed for either PODs 10, 14, 21, or 28, wherein one animal was humanely euthanized at each time point; each represented a time point of the healing process. A full-thickness excisional biopsy was taken from each wound immediately after euthanasia to give a cross-section view of the wound edge to edge. Wound healing was determined by the histological analysis of wound re-epithelialization, epidermal thickness, rete ridges, and scar elevation index and macroscopically using noninvasive imaging systems. RESULTS: The PLA and IHS treatments did not need to be reapplied to the wounds during the course of the experiment, unlike SSD, which was reapplied at each assessment time point. In terms of re-epithelialization, on POD 10, IHS and SSD were similar to the GSOC; on POD 14, all treatments were similar; on POD 21, PLA and IHS were similar to SSD; finally, on POD 28, re-epithelialization was similar in all groups. On POD 28, scar elevation index and rete ridges/mm were similar to all groups, and epidermal and dermal thickness for PLA and IHS were similar to GSOC. CONCLUSIONS: This preclinical study demonstrated that the use of the PLA and the IHS dressings resulted in similar outcomes to the GSOC-treated burns in several key metrics of wound healing. These therapies represent a potentially useful tool in current and future battlespaces, where surgical intervention is not possible. The products are lightweight and, more importantly, stable at room temperature for their entire shelf lives. This would allow for easy storage and transport by medical practitioners in the field.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]