Search

Introduction: Burn eschar removal by enzymatic debridement with NexoBrid ® (EDNX) results in a maximum preservation of all viable tissue, which is the main advantage over traditional tangential excision. The authors participated in a marketing authorization holder process to obtain reimbursement from the national health authorities in Belgium., Material and Methods: The reimbursement process consisted of three phases, as specified by the reimbursement regulations required by the Belgian National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance (NIHDI)., Results: Forty-one patients with clinically deep 2nd and 3rd degree burns, treated with EDNX in two Belgian burn centers, were included in the registry for the first phase of the reimbursement process. The total success rate of the EDNX treatment was 95.1% (39/41). Over half of the burn wounds treated with NexoBrid ® (55.2%) did not require any additional surgical debridement or skin grafting. To obtain definitive reimbursement, an extra 16 patients were included. In this population, 51.4% did not require any surgical intervention. The total success rate of the EDNX debridement in this group was 100%. Based on an estimated market share of 12% and around 75 patients in the third year after final reimbursement, a market access consultant calculated that NexoBrid ® will realize yearly savings for the Belgian Healthcare budget of at least €30.000., Conclusion: Based on the results of this Belgian registry study in combination with the yearly healthcare budget savings, the NIHDI granted a final reimbursement for EDNX treatment in adults, endorsed by the Minister of Health on November 5 th , 2019.

Intra- and transdermal administration of substances via percutaneous injection is effective but considered painful, and inconvenient in addition to bringing forth biohazardous waste material. In contrast to injection, topical drug application, which includes ointments, creams and lotions, increases the local drug load. Moreover, it has reduced side effects compared to systemic administration. However, the epidermis poses a barrier to high molecular weight substances, limiting the delivery efficiency. Dissolving microneedles (DMN) are hydrophilic, mostly polymer-based constructs that are capable of skin penetration and were developed to provide painless and direct dermal drug delivery. This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of the available clinical evidence for the use of DMN to treat various skin conditions. According to the PRISMA statement, a systematic search for articles on the use of DMN for dermatological indications was conducted on three different databases (Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane library). Only human clinical trials were considered. Qualitative assessment was done by two separate reviewers using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB 2) and Chambers' criteria assessment tools. The search yielded 1090 articles. After deduplication and removal of ineligible records, 889 records were screened on title and abstract. Full text screening was done for 18 articles and ultimately 17 articles were included of which 15 were randomized controlled trials and two were case series. The quality assessment showed that the majority of included studies had low to no risk of bias. Clinical data supports that DMN are an excellent, effective, and pain free drug delivery method for multiple dermatological disorders including skin aging, hyperpigmentation, psoriasis, warts, and keloids by supplying a painless and effective vehicle for intradermal/intralesional drug administration. Microneedle technology provides a promising non- to minimally-invasive alternative to percutaneous injection., (© 2023 Japanese Dermatological Association.)

Introduction: Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) is still not an ubiquitous part of burn care worldwide despite reported accuracy rates of more than 95%, which is significantly higher than clinical assessment alone (50-75%). The aims of Part I of this survey study are: to identify the most important barriers for the use of LDI and to provide useful recommendations for efficient implementation in routine burn care. The actual interpretation and use of LDI measurements is discussed in the Enigma Part II article., Material and Methods: 1. Informative interviews with 15 representatives of burn centers without LDI. 2. A survey among 51 burn centers with LDI by means of an extensive questionnaire. 3. In-depth interviews with 21 of the participating centers., Results: 1. All 15 centers without LDI indicated that cost of purchase in combination with maintenance of the LDI device, as well as personnel costs were the reason for not buying, while 12 (80%) also rated the current scientific evidence as insufficient. 2. Twenty-seven burn centers with an LDI (53%) participated and filled in almost the entire questionnaire. In 5 centers, cost delayed the purchase of LDI. The hospital/department paid for the LDI device in 62% of the burn centers and in 88% also for maintenance and salaries. The LDI operators were mainly surgeons (47%) or nurses (42%). In more than half of the burn centers (52%), between 2 and 5 people were trained and certified to use an LDI. In 50% of burn centers, the interpretation of the LDI scan was done by the same person doing the actual measurements. Eighty-nine percent of the burn centers considered the accuracy of the LDI scan as mainly to almost completely accurate. In case of real discrepancy between clinical diagnosis and LDI, in 48% of the burn centers (13/27) the surgeon still relied more on the clinical diagnosis despite reporting this high or almost complete accuracy rate of the LDI., Conclusions: Barriers for the routine implementation of LDI were: 1. cost of purchasing and using an LDI combined with health care systems that inadequately reimburse non-surgical management; 2. lack of awareness of or ongoing skepticism towards the scientific evidence supporting LDI use; and 3. organizational constraints combined with logistical limitations. Our recommendations for wider use of LDI technology include: 1. a cost-effective reimbursement of LDI use combined with a more appropriate valuation of expert conservative management compared to surgical therapy; 2. increased use of LDI for every mixed depth burn and; 3. specialized LDI teams to improve burn procedural flexibility and to enable embedding LDI use in the burn care routine. Implementing these measures would promote the highest standards for LDI measurements and interpretation resulting in optimal care with mutual benefits for the hospital, for burn care teams and, most importantly, for the patients., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.)

Early clinical assessment of burn depth and associated healing potential (HP) remains extremely challenging, even for experienced surgeons. Inaccurate diagnosis often leads to prolonged healing times and unnecessary surgical procedures, resulting in incremental costs, and unfavorable outcomes. Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) is currently the most objective and accurate diagnostic tool to measure blood flow and its associated HP, the main predictor for a patient's long-term functional and aesthetic outcome. A systematic review was performed on non-invasive, laser-based methods for burn depth assessment using skin microcirculation measurements to determine time to healing: Laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF), LDI and laser speckle contrast imaging (LSCI). Important drawbacks of single point LDF measurements are direct contact with numerous small points on the wound bed and the need to carry out serial measurements over several days. LDI is a fast, "non-contact," single measurement tool allowing to scan large burned areas with a 96% accuracy. LDI reduces the number of surgeries, improves the functional and aesthetic outcome and is cost-effective. There is only limited evidence for the use of LSCI in burn depth assessment. LSCI still needs technical improvements and scientific validation, before it can be approved for reliable burn assessment. LDI has proven to be invaluable in determining the optimal treatment of a burn patient. For unclear reasons, LDI is still not routinely used in burn centers worldwide. Additional research is required to identify potential "barriers" for universal implementation of this evidence-based burn depth assessment tool., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Burn Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Glycerol preserved acellular dermis (Glyaderm(®)) consists of collagen and elastin fibers and is the first non-profit dermal substitute derived from glycerol-preserved, human allogeneic skin. It is indicated for bi-layered skin reconstruction of full thickness wounds., Methods: A protocol for clinical application and optimal interval before autografting with split thickness skin graft (STSG) was developed in a pilot study. A phase III randomized, controlled, paired, intra-individual study compared full thickness defects engrafted with Glyaderm(®) and STSG versus STSG alone. Outcome measures included percentage of Glyaderm(®) take, STSG take, and scar quality assessment., Results: Pilot study (27 patients): Mean take rates equaled 91.55% for Glyaderm(®) and 96.67% for STSG. The optimal autografting interval was 6 days (±1 day). Randomized trial (28 patients): Mean Glyaderm(®) take rate was 88.17%. STSG take rates were comparable for both research groups (p=0.588). One year after wound closure, Glyaderm(®)+STSG was significantly more elastic (p=0.003) than STSG alone. Blinded observers scored Glyaderm(®) treated wounds better in terms of scar quality., Discussion: The efficacy of Glyaderm(®) as a suitable dermal substitute for full thickness wounds is attested. Currently a procedure for simultaneous application of Glyaderm(®) and STSG is adopted, allowing for further widespread use of Glyaderm(®)., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) provides early accurate determination of wound healing potential. LDI can scan large areas of up to 2500 cm2 within 2 min. This duration may require additional sedation in a mobile, uncooperative child. In five burn centres a faster Laser Doppler Line Scanner (LDLS) was assessed. This new imager scans 300 cm2 in 4s with potential benefit for patients and operators. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy and convenience of the LDLS and to compare this with an established LDI imager., Methods: Outpatients and admitted patients were included. LDI and LDLS images were obtained between 2 and 5 days post burn (PB). Photographs and records of wound and healing were obtained on day of scan and at 14 and 21 days PB. This provided data on three categories of burn wounds: healing within 14 days, 14-21 days and not healed within 21 days., Results: The analysis included 596 burn areas from 204 burns patients. An accuracy of 94.2% was found with use of the LDLS compared with 94.4% for the original LDI imager., Conclusions: The high accuracy of the new line-scan imager was comparable to that of the traditional LDI. Its size and mobility enabled easier ward and outpatient use. The higher scan speed was particularly beneficial for scans in paediatric patients., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.)

Background: Scars can be devastating and disfiguring, because they are clearly visible, stigmatizing, and permanent reminders of the initial accident or surgical event. Yet, there is still no consensus about the optimal scale or tool to assess the characteristics and evolution. Our aim was to evaluate the clinical importance of scar scales specifically developed for burn scars., Materials and Methods: The systematic literature search involved PubMed and the Web of Science (including Science Citation Index)., Results: The search resulted in 29 articles (including seven reviews) dealing with a new, modified, or validated scale. Scar scales assess several characteristics, of which color, pliability, and thickness were considered the most important. Physical limitation, pain, and pruritus are often more disturbing than the appearance of the scar, and are therefore also introduced in scar evaluation, as well as the interference with daily life activities (e.g., psychologic impact)., Conclusion: In contrast to the more objective scar assessment tools, scar scales usually cover more aspects of the scars and are less time-consuming in clinical practice. However, no strong conclusions can be made about their efficacy and validity. In addition to digital photography, scar scales are a valuable instrument in the clinical evaluation and follow-up of scars., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Accurate diagnosis of burn depth is essential in selecting the most appropriate treatment. Early assessment of burn depth by clinical means only has been shown to be inaccurate, resulting in unnecessary operations or delay of grafting procedures. Laser Doppler imaging (LDI) was reported as an objective technique to determine the depth of a burn wound, but the accuracy on very early days post burn has never been investigated yet., Methods: In 40 patients with intermediate depth burns, we prospectively evaluated and compared the accuracy of the LDI measurements with the clinical assessments on days 0, 1, 3, 5, 8. Clinical evaluation of the depth of the burn was performed by two observers blinded to the LDI images. Accuracies were assessed by comparison with outcome: healing times longer than 21 days were considered to be equivalent to a biopsy finding of a deep dermal wound. Obviously superficial and full thickness wounds were excluded. LDI flux level was used for LDI prediction of outcome: less than 220PU to predict non-healing at day 21., Results: The accuracies of burn depth assessments on the day of burn and post burn days 0, 1, 3, 5 and 8 using LDI were 54%, 79.5%, 95%, 97% and 100% compared with clinical assessment accuracies of 40.6%, 61.5%, 52.5%, 71.4% and 100%, respectively. LDI accuracy was significantly higher than clinical accuracy on day 3 (p<0.001) and day 5 (p=0.005). Burn depth conversion was also considered. This is the first study to quantify the advantage of LDI scanning over clinical assessments during these important early after burn days.

The depth of a burn wound and/or its healing potential are the most important determinants of the therapeutic management and of the residual morbidity or scarring. Traditionally, burn surgeons divide burns into superficial which heal by rapid re-epithelialization with minimal scarring and deep burns requiring surgical therapy. Clinical assessment remains the most frequent technique to measure the depth of a burn wound although this has been shown to be accurate in only 60-75% of the cases, even when carried out by an experienced burn surgeon. In this article we review all current modalities useful to provide an objective assessment of the burn wound depth, from simple clinical evaluation to biopsy and histology and to various perfusion measurement techniques such as thermography, vital dyes, video angiography, video microscopy, and laser Doppler techniques. The different needs according to the different diagnostic situations are considered. It is concluded that for the initial emergency assessment, the use of telemetry and simple burn photographs are the best option, that for research purposes a wide range of different techniques can be used but that, most importantly, for the actual treatment decisions, laser Doppler imaging is the only technique that has been shown to accurately predict wound outcome with a large weight of evidence. Moreover this technique has been approved for burn depth assessment by regulatory bodies including the FDA.

This article reports a clinical study investigating the role of polarised-light therapy in the conservative treatment of deep dermal burn wounds. In 22 out of 67 patients with deep dermal burn wounds, clinical evaluation revealed only a very limited potential for spontaneous healing, and, despite the fact that the majority of the surgeons (four out of six) would have recommended surgery, these patients were treated conservatively with polarised-light therapy (400-2000 nm, 40 m W cm(-2), 2.4 J cm(-2)) until complete closure. Evaluation by a panel of four surgeons, all experts in burn surgery, revealed that conservative treatment of these deep dermal wounds with polarised-light irradiation resulted in a significantly shorter healing time, with almost no hypertrophic scarring, and optimal aesthetic and functional results at long-term follow-up. No extension of the hospital stay was required. Polarised-light therapy may be a valuable way of avoiding surgery in patients with deep dermal burns.