title: A comparison of Biobrane vs. homograft for coverage of contaminated burn wounds.
abstract: An evaluation was made comparing homograft to Biobrane for the coverage of excised burn wounds using a rat model which had been contaminated with 1 x 10(5) Pseudomonas aeruginosa 1244. The homograft and Biobrane were then covered with either silver sulphadiazine cream, a 5 per cent mafenide acetate solution, or no topical antibacterial agent. Five days later the wounds were examined to determine the percentage of graft take. The homograft was found to have a superior graft take in this model. It is therefore recommended that a surgeon using Biobrane for the first time ensures the wound is at least as free of bacterial contamination as he would if he were using homograft.
authors.affiliation: Shriners Burns Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio.
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Gonce
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Miskell
authors.forename: J P
authors.initials: JP
authors.lastname: Waymack
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001672:Biocompatible Materials / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D002056:Burns / Q000150:complications / Q000628:therapy*; D020099:Coated Materials, Biocompatible; D009779:Occlusive Dressings; D011552:Pseudomonas Infections / Q000150:complications* / Q000628:therapy; D051381:Rats; D011912:Rats, Inbred ACI; D011917:Rats, Inbred Lew; D014184:Transplantation, Homologous
chemical_list: C042816:Biobrane; D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D020099:Coated Materials, Biocompatible