RESUMEN

Deep burn injuries necessitate effective debridement to promote healing and reduce complications. Traditional surgical debridement is the standard of care; however, it can lead to significant tissue loss, excessive bleeding and delayed healing. Bromelain-based enzymatic debridement offers a potential less invasive alternative that aims to selectively remove necrotic tissue while preserving viable ones. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis comprehensively compares bromelain debridement versus standard care in the management of partial and full-thickness burns. Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline were searched until May 30th, 2024 for studies comparing bromelain debridement versus standard care. R version 4.4.0 was used to pooled risk ratio and mean difference in a random-effects model. We included seven studies, comprising 484 participants, of whom 238 (49%) were treated with enzymatic debridement. Bromelain significantly reduced time to eschar removal (MD - 7.60 days 95% CI [-9.76, -5.44]; I² = 70%) in comparison with standard care. Additionally, bromelain group presented a significant reduction in the risk of surgical excision (RR 0.17; 95% CI [0.06, 0.47]; I² = 79%) and need for autografts (RR 0.40; 95% CI [0.18, 0.93]; I² = 76%) in comparison with standard group. No differences were found in behalf of time to wound closure (MD -7.64; 95% CI [-18.46]-[3.18]; I2 = 86%), nor in Modified Vancouver Scar Scale (MD -0.36; 95% CI [-0.96]-[0.23]; I2 = 0%). Bromelain-based enzymatic debridement may accelerate eschar removal and reduce the need for surgical excision and autografts, without adversely affecting wound closure time or long-term scar quality.

RESUMEN

We previously published the microbial profile of burn wounds managed with NexoBrid® in Pinderfields Regional Burns Centre, Wakefield, UK. Our results showed no significant changes in bacterial colonisation in burn wounds debrided with NexoBrid®. Previous studies described the antimicrobial properties of bromelain enzyme. To date, the effects of NexoBrid® on microorganisms have not been reported. In this study, a series of lab experiments were conducted to investigate the antimicrobial properties of NexoBrid®. Mueller-Hinton agar plates were pre-treated with NexoBrid® and inoculated with common pathogens after serial dilution. Our results revealed that the pre-treated plates showed reduction in the growth of E. faecalis and S. aureus. No zones of inhibition were observed around NexoBrid® after 18 h of incubation. Where a combination of controls and test solutions were added, no zones of inhibition were seen around the NexoBrid® wells in any of fifty tested organisms. The slightly lower infection rates observed in patients treated with NexoBrid® are more likely to be due to efficient selective debridement of necrotic skin rather than direct antimicrobial action.

RESUMEN

Background: For years, surgical debridement with autografting has been considered the standard of care in the treatment of severe burns of the hand. However, in recent years, enzymatic debridement has increasingly been reported as a good alternative, especially for burns of the hand, as it selectively preserves viable tissue. In this study, we aim to evaluate the long-term function of the hand after enzymatic debridement in deep dermal burns. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted as well as measurements of subjective and objective outcome measures through physical examination and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), and Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores. Results: A total of 32 enzymatically debrided hands of 24 patients were included with a mean age of 42.4 ± 16.8 years and a mean follow-up of 31 months. Postoperatively, 19 of these could be managed conservatively using skin substitutes such as "Suprathel", 13 had to undergo subsequent autografting. The mean DASH score for the entire study population was eight with a mean value of four in the conservatively managed group and fourteen in the autografted group. The mean Patient, Observer POSAS, and VSS values were nineteen, thirteen, and two. A total of 30 cases showed an effortless complete fist closure, and, also in 30 cases, patients attested to be satisfied with the esthetic appearance of the hand on being asked. Conclusions: The descriptive analysis of these results in our study population suggests that the enzymatic debridement of deep burns of the hand, especially combined with subsequent conservative management with skin substitutes, was associated with low long-term hand disability scores at a follow-up of two years.

RESUMEN

When compared to standard surgical management, rapid enzymatic debridement of deep burns reduces the need for surgery while achieving similar long-term results. However, few studies have directly compared the costs of standard surgical and enzymatic burn care. We conducted a study comparing the care costs of 44 adult burn patients treated before (n=22) and after (n=22) introducing rapid bromelain-based enzymatic debridement (BED) of deep burns. Mean age was 59 years, 54% were male, and mean total body surface area (TBSA) was 23.5%. Burn etiology included flame and scalding burns (8). Groups treated with standard of care and enzymatic debridement were comparable in terms of age, sex and TBSA. Burn management with BED significantly reduced total debridement costs as well as grand total costs when compared with traditional surgical care. Such reduction was mostly related to lower costs associated with reduced surgical care and less facilities and resources consumption in the BED group.

Comparativement au traitement standard, l'excision enzymatique précoce (EEP) réduit la nécessité de chirurgie, à résultats égaux à long termes. Très peu d'études ont comparé les coûts de ces deux stratégies. Nous avons comparé 2 groupes de 22 patients profondément brûlés ayant pour l'un été pris en charge conventionnellement, l'autre ayant bénéficié d'une EEP. L'âge moyen était de 59 ans, 54% étaient des hommes, la surface brûlée moyenne de 23,5% (les 2 groupes étaient comparables). Seuls 8 patients avaient été ébouillantés, les autres étant brûlés par flamme. L'utilisation d'EEP réduisait significativement le coût de la prise en charge, en rapport avec la réduction de l'utilisation de locaux et de matériel consécutifs à la chirurgie.

RESUMEN

Investigating the growing concern of pediatric burn injuries caused by social media challenges. Adolescents, seeking fame or succumbing to peer pressure, engage in risky behaviors, recording and sharing them online. The study presents two case reports detailing severe burn injuries resulting from such challenges, highlighting the physical and psychological toll on affected children and their families. In Case report 1, a 14-year-old suffered severe burns attempting a TikTok challenge involving igniting a soaked t-shirt. The patient's critical condition necessitated intensive care, surgical procedures, and skin grafts, accompanied by complications like anemia and sepsis. Case report 2 features a 9-year-old who sustained extensive burns while attempting another social media challenge. Treatment included escharolysis, skin grafts, and surgeries, with complications managed during the recovery process. A literature review explores social media-generated burn injuries, revealing their physical and psychological impact. The influence of social proof and peer pressure on adolescents' behavior in the digital age is discussed. The pandemic's effect on mental health is considered, emphasizing the vulnerability of adolescents to such challenges. In conclusion, the paper highlights the rising incidence of teen burn injuries linked to social media challenges. Urgent measures are needed to restrict the promotion of risky behaviors on social platforms. Alongside state-of-the-art burn treatments, comprehensive psychological care is essential for young patients and their families to cope with trauma. Increased content monitoring and the dissemination of prevention materials are recommended to mitigate the occurrence of such incidents.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Current evidence on how the use of bromelain-based enzymatic debridement techniques (NexoBrid™) affect patient coagulation is limited. A single patient case report [1] suggests that a patient with 15% total body surface area (TBSA) burn developed decreased coagulation activity following debridement with NexoBrid™ enzymatic debridement (ED). Regional Burns Centres in the United Kingdom may be reluctant to use ED, particularly in larger burns, citing concerns regarding coagulation. At our centre we have routinely used ED on deep partial thickness burns since 2017 including on patients with burns over 15% TBSA. This study aims to investigate whether there is a significant disruption in coagulation in patients undergoing ED with burns > 15% TBSA or admitted to intensive care compared to the standard of care (SOC) which is surgical debridement in theatre. METHODS: This single-centre retrospective study includes all patients with a burn treated with ED at Pinderfields General Hospital Regional Burns Centre intensive care unit (ITU) from 2017 to 2020. Patients were matched to those treated with SOC at the same centre by age, % TBSA burn and presence of inhalational injury. These parameters correlate with the Baux score [9]. Percentage of burn debrided was matched as closely as possible, with coagulation profiles and platelet count taken the day before, the day of and three days following surgery. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were treated with ED in the intensive care unit between 2017 and 2020. Four patients were excluded due to insufficient records and one patient was anti-coagulated. Twenty-six patients were included and matched as described above. Average age of patients receiving ED was 44 years, the same in the matched group. Average TBSA burn is 35.5% (35.8% in matched group). No statistically significant difference in coagulation was seen between patients undergoing ED compared to SOC when considering prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and platelet count. Both groups slightly breached the upper limit of normal on day 2 post ED and SOC. There was a slight breach of the lower limit of the average platelet count on day 2 post-ED which was neither statistically nor clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Large burns are associated with coagulation abnormalities, therefore isolating a single variable in this cohort is challenging. However, this study found no significant change following ED use when compared to SOC and therefore no convincing evidence that ED is associated with coagulation abnormalities. This study represents one of the largest focusing on coagulation abnormalities following the use of ED, as the current literature is limited. Our study suggests that concerns regarding coagulation abnormalities should not prevent patients with large, deep partial thickness burns or full thickness burns being treated with ED.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Accurate burn depth assessment and early excision of burn eschar with maximal dermal preservation are key concepts in the optimal care of burn injury. Although excision with knife has long since been standard of care, a newer technique for wound bed preparation utilizing a bromelain-based enzyme has gained popularity worldwide and may offer several advantages. AREAS COVERED: Here we report the pharmacologic properties, evidence for clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability of anacaulase-bcdb for the treatment of deep partial thickness and full thickness burns. EXPERT OPINION: Anacaulase-bcdb is a safe, non-surgical, selective eschar removal agent. It offers advantages over surgical excision of burn with knife and fulfills two unmet needs: burn depth assessment and dermal preservation during excision. Evidence supports a faster time to complete eschar removal; reduced number of operations; reduction in the amount of autografting, length of stay, and blood loss; prevention of burn induced compartment syndrome; and improved cosmetic outcome.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Despite improvements in treatment methods and outcomes, burns remain one of the principal causes of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Burns involving the hands are estimated to occur in >80% of people with burns. Hand burns have also been associated with long-term social, psychological and physical consequences that can impede a patient's full reintegration to the community and decrease their overall quality of life. Clinically, when the trajectory towards complete re-epithelialisation stalls in deep burn wounds of the hand, skin grafting is indicated, but cosmetic problems often remain. A recent publication highlighted common complications for burns involving the hand such as scar disturbances (26%) and scar contractures (14%). Innovative approaches with the potential to reduce the occurrence of complicating scar disturbances and contractures are sought by healthcare providers specialising in burns. This case report describes a novel approach to wound closure using a topical concentrate of proteolytic enzymes followed by the application of an autologous skin cell suspension. This combination was effective in achieving early and complete re-epithelialisation of a deep burn of the palm of a 28-year-old male patient, while potentially affording a favourable impact on hypertrophic scarring or scar contracture.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

In 2012 the European Medicines Agency approved a pineapple stem-derived Bromelain-based debridement concentrate of proteolytic enzymes (NexoBrid®, MediWound Ltd, Yavne, Israel) for adult deep burns. Over 10 000 patients have been successfully treated with NexoBrid® globally, including in the US. The aim of our study is to perform a systematic review of the current literature on Nexobrid® outcomes. We conducted a literature search in PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and other search engines (2013-2023). The online screening process was performed by two independent reviewers with the Covidence tool. The protocol was reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses, and it was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews of the National Institute for Health Research. We identified 103 relevant studies of which 34 were found eligible. The included studies report the positive effects of Nexobrid® on burn debridement, functional and cosmetic outcomes, scarring, and quality of life. Also, they validate the high patient satisfaction thanks to enhanced protocols of analgosedation and/or locoregional anaesthesia during Bromelain-based debridement. Two studies investigate potential risks (coagulopathy, burn wound infection) which concluded there is no strong evidence of these adverse events. NexoBrid® is a safe, selective, non-surgical eschar removal treatment modality. The benefits of Bromelain-based debridement are faster debridement and healing times, reduced operations, length of stay, cases of sepsis, blood transfusions, and prevention of compartment syndrome. Existing evidence suggests that the indications and the role of Bromelain-based debridement are expanding to cover "off-label" cases with significant benefits to the global healthcare economy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction: Surgical burn excision (along with skin grafting) carries the risk of blood loss. The use of enzymatic debridement agents such as Nexobrid® has gained increased popularity as an alternative to surgical debridement in the management of burns with its reported benefits of selective burn debridement, minimising blood loss and potentially reducing the need for skin grafting. However, there is limited evidence regarding its effects on bleeding. Currently, the manufacturer declares there is no evidence for increased risk of localised bleeding and its systemic effects upon coagulation are less clear. Methods: We present two clinical cases demonstrating the possible effects of Nexobrid® on coagulation and bleeding at the debridement site. Comparisons are drawn with the manufacturers' guidance as well as evaluating the current recommendations of its use. Discussion: Nexobrid® is a novel therapy and there are few adverse effects reported in the literature. The basis of its appeal is the reduced blood loss at the debridement site and the selectivity it possesses in preserving healthy dermis. However, our cases have demonstrated that haemorrhage can occur and that those using Nexobrid® should be mindful of the potential bleeding risk from varicosities within the burn wound. We have also illustrated that Nexobrid® can be used in patients with pre-existing clotting disorders without requiring the use of blood products. However, we emphasise the importance of haematological support for its safe administration. Lay Summary: Nexobrid®, a debriding agent that contains enzymes, has been developed as an alternative to surgery which for most surgeons is the traditional method of removing dead tissue following a burn injury. The active agent is bromelain and this is derived from the stems of pineapples. This novel treatment is increasingly being used in the management of middle to deep skin thickness burns and it seems to have a number of benefits such as reducing blood loss, reducing the need for skin grafting as well as being able to treat burns in certain areas of the body that would be technically challenging to remove in the standard fashion. It simply targets the dead tissue leaving viable remnants of the skin that would hopefully allow healing to occur without the need for surgical intervention. Being a relatively new concept, current evidence regarding the safety and value of Nexobrid® continues to develop. In 2020, an agreement guideline outlining best practice with the use of Nexobrid® was published. In this statement, it was advised that caution should be taken when using Nexobrid® in patients who have blood clotting disturbances as this could increase the likelihood of bleeding. However, they did not mention that excessive bleeding can potentially occur with this treatment.We present two clinical cases demonstrating the possible effects of Nexobrid® on the clotting system and bleeding at the application site. Comparisons are drawn with the manufacturers' guidance as well as assessing the current recommendations of its use. We illustrate that Nexobrid® can be safely used in patients with pre-existing clotting disturbances if the correct procedures are performed. We also highlight the potential complication of excessive bleeding if Nexobrid® is used in patients who have co-existing enlarged surface veins along with their burn injury. We feel the guidance should be updated to reflect these findings.

RESUMEN

The treatment of geriatric burn patients represents a major challenge in burn care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of enzymatic debridement (ED) in geriatric burn patients. Adult patients who received ED for treatment of mixed pattern and full thickness burns (August 2017-October 2022) were included in this study and grouped in the younger (18-65 years) and geriatric (≥65 years) groups. Primary outcome was a necessity of surgery subsequent to ED. Both groups (patient characteristics, surgical and non-surgical treatment) were compared. Multiple logistic and linear regression models were used to identify the effect of age on the outcomes. A total of 169 patients were included (younger group: 135 patients, geriatric group: 34 patients). The burn size as indicated by %TBSA (24.2 ± 20.4% vs. 26.8 ± 17.1%, p = 0.499) was similar in both groups. The ASA (2.5 ± 1.1 vs. 3.4 ± 1.1, p < 0.001) and ABSI scores (6.1 ± 2.8 vs. 8.6 ± 2.3, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the geriatric group. The %TBSA treated with ED (5.4 ± 5.0% vs. 4.4 ± 4.3%, p = 0.245) were similar in both groups. The necessity of additional surgical interventions (63.0 % vs. 58.8 %, p = 0.763) and the wound size debrided and grafted (2.9 ± 3.5% vs. 2.2 ± 2.1%; p = 0.301) were similar in both groups. Regression models yielded that age did not have an effect on efficacy of ED. We showed that ED is reliable and safe to use in geriatric patients. Age did not have a significant influence on the surgical outcomes of ED. In both groups, the size of the grafted area was reduced and, in many patients, surgery was avoided completely.

RESUMEN

Since its approval in Europe a decade ago, NexoBrid® enzymatic debridement of deep thermal burns has been gaining acceptance as standard practice around the world. The purpose of this study is to report the first experience with NexoBrid® in the Russian Federation. During 2019-2020, we conducted a post-registration clinical study assessing the safety and treatment results of NexoBrid® enzymatic debridement. The study involved 15 adult patients suffering from deep thermal burns over an area ≤15% of their total body surface area. Patients were treated with NexoBrid® within 3 days of injury, followed by spontaneous or surgical wound closure. Complete eschar removal was achieved in twelve patients, 80% eschar removal in two patients, and 70% in one patient. Complete spontaneous epithelialization of wounds was achieved in 12 patients (80%) within 18 ± 1.9 days after the start of treatment. We did not witness pathological scarring during follow-up, and there were no significant safety issues throughout the study. Early use of NexoBrid® resulted in rapid, effective, and safe eschar removal with good results and sufficient preservation of viable dermis to allow for spontaneous healing in 80% of patients. These results demonstrate the ability to minimize surgical intervention and hopefully lead to better long-term scarring results.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Circumferential deep burns carry a high risk for a burn induced compartment syndrome. It was recently shown that an enzymatic bromelain-based debridement with Nexobrid® is a safe and efficient procedure to release pressure in deep circumferential extremity burns reducing the need for surgical escharotomy. We therefore herein aimed to analyze the conceptual relation between Nexobrid® and surgical escharotomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on all patients with circumferential deep partial-thickness or full-thickness burns requiring immediate escharotomy that was either performed by surgical incision or Nexobrid®. Medical records of 792 patients that were treated at the burn center of the University Hospital Zurich between 2016 and 2021 were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 62 patients with circumferential deep partial-thickness or full-thickness burns who received preventive decompression either by Nexobrid® (N = 29) or surgical escharotomy (N = 33), were included. Whilst distribution of age, sex, BMI and type of injury showed no difference between the groups, the ABSI score, TBSA, percentage of third degree burns and mortality were significantly higher in patients who received a surgical escharotomy. CONCLUSION: While the use of Nexobrid® to prevent burn induced compartment syndrome has steadily increased, surgical escharotomies were predominantly performed in severely burned patients with a high degree of full-thickness burns. Thus, higher mortality in this patient group needs to be considered with caution and is mainly attributed to the higher TBSA. Although evidence is lacking for the use of Nexobrid® for larger body areas exceeding 15%, escharotomy is also the more reliable and faster approach in such critically burned patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Bromelain-based enzymatic debridement is gaining increased interest from burn specialists in the last few years. The objective of this manuscript is to update the previous, first Spanish consensus document from 2017 (Martínez-Méndez et al. 43:193-202, 2017), on the use of enzymatic debridement with NexoBrid® in burn injuries, adding the clinical experience of a larger panel of experts, integrating plastic surgeons, intensivists, and anesthesiologists. Methods: A consensus guideline was established by following a modified Delphi methodology of a 38-topic survey in two rounds of participation. Items were grouped in six domains: general indication, indication in critical patients, pain management, conditions for NexoBrid® application, NexoBrid® application technique, and post-debridement wound care. Results: In the first round, experts established consensus (strongly agree or agree) on 13 of the 38 statements. After the second round, a consensus was reached on 24 of the 25 remaining statements (97.2%). Conclusions: The present updated consensus document provides recommendations on the use of bromelain-based enzymatic debridement NexoBrid®, integrating the extensive clinical experience of plastic surgeons, intensivists, and anesthesiologists in Spain. Further clinical trials and studies are required to corroborate, modify, or fine tune the current statements.

RESUMEN

Enzymatic debridement (ED) is increasingly used for cutaneous burns. Compared with surgical debridement, ED has better preservation of viable dermis, less blood loss and autografting, however ED is painful. Current recommendations suggest local anaesthesia (LA) is useful for minor burns, but the evidence base is minimal. In our centre, we routinely use LA with good analgesic effect. This study was a single-centre, prospective analysis conducted at the Queen Victoria Hospital (UK). Patients had at least superficial partial thickness burns and received subcutaneous LA prior to ED during a 1-year period (October 2019-September 2020). Pain was assessed using a numeric scale of 1-10, recorded before, during and after the procedure. In total, 27 patients were included (n=17 males) with a median age of 47 (18-88 years). The mean total burn surface area was 1.5% (0.3-5.0). Treated sites included head and neck (1), trunk (5), upper limb (9) and lower limb (16). The most used LAwas bupivacaine 0.25% (n=25), followed by lidocaine 1% (n=2). Some required additional oral analgesia (n=8) or a regional blockade (n=2). Average pain score during debridement was 1.9 We have found LA effective, with favourable pain scores in comparison to previous studies with oral analgesia or regional blockade. LA is quick and easy to perform, as opposed to nerve blocks, which require trained personnel with ultrasound guidance. LA is a useful analgesic for patients with minor cutaneous burns undergoing ED. In some cases, it is sufficient without additional oral analgesia or regional blockade.

Le débridement enzymatique (DE) des brûlures est de plus en plus utilisé, ayant l'avantage d'être moins hémorragique et plus respectueux des tissus sains que la chirurgie, au prix d'une douleur plus importante. Les recommandations actuelles suggèrent l'utilisation de l'anesthésie locale (AL) sur les petites zones, avec un niveau de preuve minime. Dans notre centre, nous utilisons régulièrement l'AL, avec un bon effet analgésique. Cette étude a été conduite dans le CTB de l'hôpital Queen Vicoria (Royaume Uni). Durant 1 année (octobre 2019- septembre 2020), les patients devant bénéficier d'un DE recevaient préalablement une AL par infiltration. La douleur a été évaluée par échelle numérique (0 à 10) avant, pendant et après la procédure. Nous avons étudié 27 patients dont 17 hommes, d'âge médian 47 ans (18 à 88), brûlés en moyenne sur 1,5% (0,3 à 5), sur le cou (1), le tronc (5), le membre supérieur (9) et le membre supérieur (16). La bupivacaïne 0,25% a été la plus utilisée (25 fois), la lidocaïne 1% l'étant anecdotiquement (2 fois). Une analgésie complémentaire a été 10 fois nécessaire : orale 8 fois, régionale 2 fois. La douleur procédurale était cotée à 1,9 en moyenne. Nous estimons que l'AL est efficace, avec des scores de douleur favorables comparativement aux analgésies orale ou régionale. À la différence des analgésies régionales qui nécessitent un personnel entraîné et un écho- guidage, l'AL est facile et rapide. Elle peut être suffisante à elle seule pour le DE de brûlures minimes.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Deep partial-thickness burns are traditionally treated by tangential excision and split thickness skin graft (STSG) coverage. STSGs create donor site morbidity and increase the wound surface in burn patients. Herein, we present a novel concept consisting of enzymatic debridement of deep partial-thickness burns followed by co-delivery of autologous keratinocyte suspension and plated-rich fibrin (PRF) or fibrin glue. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a retrospective case study, patients with deep partial-thickness burns treated with enzymatic debridement and autologous cell therapy combined with PRF or fibrin glue (BroKerF) between 2017 and 2018 were analysed. BroKerF was applied to up to 15% total body surface area (TBSA); larger injuries were combined with surgical excision and skin grafting. Exclusion criteria were age <18 or >70 years, I°, IIa°-only, III° burns and loss of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients with burn injuries of 16.8% ± 10.3% TBSA and mean Abbreviated Burn Severity Score 5.45 ± 1.8 were identified. Of the patients, 65% (n = 13) were treated with PRF, while 35% (n = 7) were treated with fibrin glue. The mean area treated with BroKerF was 7.5% ± 0.05% TBSA, mean time to full epithelialization was 21.06 ± 9.2 days and mean hospitalization time was 24.7 ± 14.4 days. Of the patients, 35% (n = 7) needed additional STSG, 43% (n = 3) of whom had biopsy-proven wound infections. CONCLUSION: BroKerF is an innovative treatment strategy, which, in our opinion, will show its efficacy when higher standardization is achieved. The combination of selective debridement and autologous skin cells in a fibrin matrix combines regenerative measures for burn treatment. LAY SUMMARY: Patients suffering from large burn wounds often require the use of large skin grafts to bring burned areas to heal. Before the application of skin grafts, the burned skin must be removed either by surgery or using enzymatic agents. In this article, we describe a method where small areas of skin are taken and skin cells are extracted and sprayed on wound areas that were treated with an enzymatic agent. The cells are held in place by a substance extracted from patients' blood (PRF) that is sprayed on the wound together with the skin cells. We believe this technique can be helpful to reduce the need of skin grafts in burned patients and improve the healing process.

RESUMEN

The antimicrobial properties of bromelain have been previously studied. However, the effect of enzymatic debridement on bacterial colonisation in burn wounds was not described in literature. In this study, we examine whether bromelain-based enzymatic debridement using NexoBrid® gel alters the microbiological pattern of burn wounds. Bacterial emergences in burn wounds that were enzymatically debrided at Pinderfields Regional Burns Centre, between July 2016 and February 2019, were studied and compared to the bacterial profile of burn wounds that were managed either by surgical debridement or dressings only during the same period. Our results showed that the microbial profile of burn wounds treated with NexoBrid® is similar to what is widely reported in cases treated without enzymatic debridement, at all stages of wound healing. This particularly showed in the predominance of Gram-positive organisms in the first week and Gram-negative in the second week.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Much of the recent literature on bromelain based enzymatic debridement of burn injury has focused on its use in smaller burn injury and specialist areas such as the hands or genitals (Krieger et al., 2012; Schulz et al., 2017a,b,c,d). This is despite the original papers describing its use in larger burn injury (Rosenberg et al., 2004, 2014). The current EMA license for Nexobrid™ advises that it should not be used for burn injuries of more than 15% TBSA and should be used with caution in patients with pulmonary burn trauma and suspected pulmonary burn trauma. The original safety and efficacy trial of NexoBrid™ limited its use to 15% TBSA aliquots with concern regarding the effect of bromelain on coagulation. In a European consensus paper of experienced burns clinicians, now on its second iteration, 100% of respondents agreed that "up to 30% BSA can be treated by enzymatic debridement based on individual decision" (Hirche et al., 2017). Hofmaenner et al.'s recent study on the safety of enzymatic debridement in extensive burns larger than 15% provides some further evidence that "bromelain based enzymatic debridement can be carried out safely in large-area burns" (Hofmaenner et al., 2020) but the literature is scant in these larger debridement areas. In our centre we have been using enzymatic debridement for resuscitation level burn injury since 2016. We have gained significant learning in this time; this article aims to describe our current protocol for enzymatic debridement in this patient population and highlight specific learning points that might aid other centres in using enzymatic debridement for larger burn injury. METHOD: We performed a search of the IBID database to identify all adult patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria of resuscitation level burn injury (defined as total burn surface area (TBSA) ≥15% in patients aged >16 years), or level 3 admission following burn injury and who underwent Enzymatic Debridement. A case note review was completed, and details comprising patient demographics, TBSA, mechanism of burn, presence of inhalation injury, sequencing of debridement, length of ICU and hospital stay, blood product utilisation and the need for autografting were recorded. No ethical approval has been sought for this retrospective review. RESULTS: We identified 29 patients satisfying the inclusion criteria (Table 1). Between June 2016 and June 2020 the average total burn size of patients who had at least some of their burn treated by enzymatic debridement increased from 21.4% in 2016/17 to 34.7% in 2019/20. In these patients the actual area treated by enzymatic debridement also increased from 11.9% TBSA to 20.3% TBSA. 19 patients (66%) had enzymatic debridement performed within 24 h of injury, a further 2 patients (7%) within 48 h after injury. Patients were more likely to have enzymatic debridement commenced in the first 24 h after injury if they had circumferential limb injury (39% vs 9%) or were planned for enzyme only debridement (78% vs 28%). Those who were planned for combination enzyme and surgical debridement were more likely to have enzymatic debridement commenced after the first 48 h (75%). We have performed enzymatic debridement overnight on one occasion, for a patient who presented with circumferential limb injury and was determined to undergo urgent debridement. CONCLUSION: Much of the literature has described the use of enzymatic debridement in smaller burns, and specialist areas. However, it is our opinion that the advantages of enzymatic debridement appear to be greater in larger burns with a facility for whole burn excision on the day of admission in the ICU cubicle. We have demonstrated significantly reduced blood loss, improved dermal preservation, reduced need for autografting, and a reduction in the number of trips to theatre. We would advocate that both the team and the patient need to be as prepared as they would be for a traditional surgical excision. The early part of our learning curve for enzymatic debridement in resuscitation level injuries was steep, and we were able to build on experience from managing smaller injuries. We recommend any team wishing to using enzymatic debridement gain experience in the same way and develop robust local pathways prior to attempting use in larger burn injuries.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Enzymatic debridement of burn eschar became an accepted and widely used technique for burn wound treatment over the last years. However, this practice is not exempt from failure and recent experimental studies indicate that it may not be as efficient in scalds as in flame burns. METHODS: Patients that were admitted to the burn intensive care unit between June 2017 and February 2021 and received enzymatic debridement within the first 72 h after scald and flame burn were included. Patients with scald burns were matched regarding age, sex and per cent total body surface area (%TBSA) burned in a 1:2 ratio with patients presenting with flame burns. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with scald burns were matched with 36 with flame burns. After matching, both groups were similar in terms of age (flame burns 44.5 ± 21.1 years vs. scald 41.8 ± 22.6 years, p = 0.666), and %TBSA burned (11.0 ± 8.2% vs. 10.6 ± 9.6%, p = 0.851). Patients with scald burns significantly more often underwent further surgical eschar excision compared to controls (scald 16 (88.9%) vs. flame 19 (52.8%), p = 0.016). Length of stay per %TBSA was significantly longer in scald burns (scald 7.8 ± 9.2 days vs. flame 3.7 ± 3.8, p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: This study indicates that enzymatic debridement may not be as effective in scalds as in flame burns. It was shown that patients with scalds and subsequent enzymatic debridement more frequently underwent additional surgical intervention and that the size of the transplanted area was larger compared to control. Moreover, those patients had a longer length of stay at the hospital per %TBSA burned.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The modern ethos of burn care requires a holistic approach that helps patients to not only survive but also maintain a good quality of life. Bromelain-based enzymatic debridement with Nexobrid™ (NXB) has been shown to selectively debride burnt tissue and allow dermal preservation, which has the potential to reduce surgical burden and improve scarring. In this study, early experience with the use of Nexobrid™ at a tertiary burns centre between July 2016 and December 2019 is presented. In particular, the study assessed whether NXB had changed the acute care delivered to this cohort. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the patients' records was performed. Results were analysed and presented in the context of current literature. RESULTS: Twenty adult patients (17 male, 3 female) underwent enzymatic debridement with NXB. Median age was 42.5 years. Mean total burn surface area (TBSA) on admission was 20%. Twelve patients were admitted to the intensive care unit, and eight were admitted to the adult burns ward. Mean TBSA treated with NXB was 8.2%, usually within 24 h of admission (mean). All patients had anaesthetist-led analgesia. NXB debridement was successful in 55% of patients, obviating the need for escharotomy in some patients. Sixty percent of all patients required further surgery, and 80% of facial burns treated with NXB required further surgery. Inotrope support was associated with NXB failure (p = 0.015). Mean length of stay was 29 days. DISCUSSION: Current evidence, including our own findings, cannot justify replacing the current surgical standard of care with NXB, but it certainly solidifies enzymatic debridement as a useful adjunct that should form part of the modern burn surgeon's armamentarium.

Asunto(s)