• Matilda Karlsson, Ingrid Steinvall, Folke Sjöberg, Pia Olofsson, and Moustafa Elmasry.
• Department of Hand Surgery, Plastic Surgery and Burns, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. Electronic address: Matilda.Karlsson@regionostergotland.se.
• Burns. 2020 May 1; 46 (3): 546-551.

IntroductionIn line with other researchers in the field of burns' care, we think that research investigating the long-term outcome of scars is largely lacking. As scarring is of the utmost importance to the patient, clinicians who treat burns must aim to find treatments that lead to a good end result. The aim of this study was to study scar outcomes at six and 12 months after injury. It is an extension of a previous randomised controlled trial (RCT) in which two dressings (porcine xenograft and silver foam dressing) were examined with respect to their ability to help heal partial thickness scalds.MethodChildren aged six months - six years with acute partial thickness scalds, on the trunk, or extremities, or both, were included. In the previous study, the silver foam was found to have significantly shorter healing times than the xenograft. Children were assessed at six and 12 months after injury for this study, and photographs were taken of the burn site, and both the patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) and the Vancouver scar scale (VSS) were completed and evaluated by blinded observers.ResultsOf the 58 children from the original RCT, 39 returned to the clinic for evaluation of their scars at six months, and 34 at 12 months after injury. There were no differences in POSAS, VSS total scores, or incidence of hypertrophic scarring between the different dressings. Fifteen children were assessed as having hypertrophic scarring, all of whom had healing times that had extended beyond 14 days.ConclusionsThis study compared burn scarring after two different treatments for burns in children with partial-thickness scalds and the data suggested that neither dressing had a more favourable impact on scar outcome. The conclusion is, however, tempered by the non-return of all the patients to the follow up. However, as anticipated, regardless of the dressing used, longer healing times were associated with higher scar scores (more scarring) and hypertrophic scarring.Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.

29 keywords...

hide…