Zhu Zhijun, Xu Guoshi, Zhao Jing
Department of Burns, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Qingdao Shandong, PR China.
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2006 Jul;20(7):735-8.
To observe clinical effects of burn wounds treatment with bovine amnion and to screen the best method of preparing and storing of bovine amnion.
From January 2004 to January 2005. We selected randomly 58 patients with superficial secondary wound, deep secondary wound, autografting area for removal of eschars and tangential excision, fetching skin area or residual burn wound . Using auto-control, every burn wound was divided into 3 parts and was treated with 3 dressings: bovine amnion dealt with by 0.1% chlorhexidine (group A), bovine amnion dealt with by 0.4% glutaraldehyde (group B) and vaseline gauze dressing (group C as control). The clinical effects were compared between different groups and the method of preparing and storing bovine amnion was evaluated.
The dressing texture of group A was softer than that of group B, and its flexibility was fine. The pre-treatment was not necessary for dressing in group A. When the dressing was used on burn wounds in groups A and B, pain was slight, but pain was obvious in group C; healing time in groups A and B was much less than that in group C, showing statistically significant difference (P<0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in healing time between groups A and B (P>0.05). The infection ratio of burn wound in deep secondary wound and residual burn wound of groups A and B is much lower than that of group C, showing statistically significant difference (P<0.05); in the other burn wounds there was no significant difference (P>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between groups A and B (P> 0.05).
Bovine amnion could make benefit on burn wounds healing, reduce infection ratio of burn wounds, could be used on different kinds of burn wounds. The clinical effect between bovine amnion dealt with by glutaraldehyde and by chlorhexidine is similar. Whereas the latter is more easy to be popularized.
观察牛胎膜治疗烧伤创面的临床效果，筛选牛胎膜最佳制备及保存方法。
2004年1月至2005年1月。随机选取58例浅Ⅱ度创面、深Ⅱ度创面、切痂及削痂后自体皮移植区、取皮区或残余烧伤创面患者。采用自身对照法，将每个烧伤创面分为3部分，分别用3种敷料处理：0.1%洗必泰处理的牛胎膜（A组）、0.4%戊二醛处理的牛胎膜（B组）和凡士林纱布敷料（C组作为对照）。比较不同组间的临床效果，并对牛胎膜的制备及保存方法进行评价。
A组敷料质地比B组柔软，柔韧性良好。A组敷料使用前无需预处理。A、B组敷料用于烧伤创面时疼痛轻微，C组疼痛明显；A、B组愈合时间明显少于C组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）。A、B组愈合时间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。A、B组深Ⅱ度创面及残余烧伤创面的烧伤创面感染率明显低于C组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；其他烧伤创面差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。A、B组间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。
牛胎膜有助于烧伤创面愈合，降低烧伤创面感染率，可用于各类烧伤创面。戊二醛处理的牛胎膜与洗必泰处理的牛胎膜临床效果相似。但后者更易于推广。
