Publication: Inflammatory reaction, clinical efficacy, and safety of bacterial cellulose wound dressing containing silk sericin and polyhexamethylene biguanide for wound treatment
Issued Date
2018-12-01
Resource Type
ISSN
1432069X
03403696
03403696
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85054801027
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Archives of Dermatological Research. Vol.310, No.10 (2018), 795-805
Suggested Citation
Supamas Napavichayanun, Sumate Ampawong, Tavornchai Harnsilpong, Apichai Angspatt, Pornanong Aramwit Inflammatory reaction, clinical efficacy, and safety of bacterial cellulose wound dressing containing silk sericin and polyhexamethylene biguanide for wound treatment. Archives of Dermatological Research. Vol.310, No.10 (2018), 795-805. doi:10.1007/s00403-018-1871-3 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/46139
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Inflammatory reaction, clinical efficacy, and safety of bacterial cellulose wound dressing containing silk sericin and polyhexamethylene biguanide for wound treatment
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© 2018, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature. Bacterial cellulose wound dressings containing silk sericin and PHMB (BCSP) were developed in our previous studies. It had good physical properties, efficacy, and safety. For further use as a medical material, this dressing was investigated for its efficacy and safety in split-thickness skin graft (STSG) donor-site wound treatment compared to Bactigras® (control). Moreover, the inflammatory responses to both dressings were also deeply investigated. For in vivo study, expressions of anti-inflammatory cytokines were intensely considered in the tissue interfacing area. The result showed that IL-4 and TGF-β from BCSP-treated tissue had advantages over Bactigras®-treated tissue at 14 and 21 days post-implantation. For clinical study, a single-blinded, randomized controlled study was generated. The half of STSG donor site wound was randomly assigned to cover with BCSP or Bactigras®. Twenty-one patients with 32 STSG donor site wounds were enrolled. The results showed that wound-healing time was not significantly different in both dressings. However, wound quality of BCSP was better than Bactigras® at healing time and after 1 month (p < 0.05). The pain scores of BCSP-treated wound were statistically significant lower than Bactigras®-treated wound (p < 0.05). No sign of infection or adverse event was observed after treatment with both dressings. In conclusion, the inflammation responses of the dressing were clearly clarified. The advantages of BCSP were wound-quality improvement, pain reduction, and infection protection without adverse events. It was fit to be used as the alternative treatment of STSG donor site wound.