Original contributionComparison between topical honey and Mafenide acetate (cas 13009-99-9) in treatment of auricular burn

Add time:08/30/2019    Source:sciencedirect.com

The auricle is a frequently injured part of the head and neck during thermal injury leading to ear deformity. The burned ear represents one of the most difficult problems for reconstructive surgeons. Mafenide acetate (cas 13009-99-9) is a topical agent used routinely for these patients, but it has some disadvantages including painful application and allergic rash. Some authors have reported the healing effect and antibacterial activity of honey. The study reported here was undertaken to compare the effect of honey and mafenide acetate on auricular burn in rabbit. In our study, although the pathologic score of the honey group was better than that of the mafenide group both on 14 and 21 days after burning, it was not statistically significant. In the mafenide acetate group, deep complication of burn (chondritis) was significantly lower than that of the honey group. In conclusion, in contrast to healing and antibiotic activity reported for honey, it may have failure in preventing deep bacterial complications of wound (like chondritis). So in deep wounds, the use of honey as dressing is not recommended.

We also recommend Trading Suppliers and Manufacturers of Mafenide acetate (cas 13009-99-9). Pls Click Website Link as below: cas 13009-99-9 suppliers

Prev:Thermal stability of mafenide and amphotericin B topical solution
Next:Systemic absorption of amphotericin B with topical 5% Mafenide acetate (cas 13009-99-9)/amphotericin B solution for grafted burn wounds: Is it clinically relevant?)