Burns, Chronic Wound, Diabetic Foot Ulcer, Irrigation Solution, Pressure Injury
Conditions
Keywords
Prontosan wound irrigation solution, Prontosan, Chronic wound, Pressure Injury, Burns, Diabetic Foot Ulcer
Brief summary
The goal of this prospective, multi-center, randomized, parallel-controlled, open-label clinical study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Prontosan wound irrigation solution comparing with Normal Saline on the removal of wound bacterial biofilm through observing the morphological characteristics and development of bacterial biofilm in chronic wound patients with secondary infections. The main questions it aims to answer are: * Difference in scoring the positive rate of bacterial biofilm before the first treatment and on the 7th day of treatment in Group A and Group B * Difference in scoring the positive rate of bacterial biofilm before the first treatment and on the 3rd day of treatment in Group A and Group B . * Positive detection rate of bacterial biofilm in group and group B before the first treatment, and on the 3rd and 7th day of treatment, and difference of the positive detection rate of biofilm among the two groups. * 4-phase typing of bacterial biofilm detected in Group A, Group B and Group C before the first treatment, and on the 3rd and 7th day of treatment, and the proportion difference of 4-phase typing of biofilm among the two groups. * Wound healing rate * Skin Infection Rating Scale (SIRS) score. * Distribution of inflammatory cells on the wound. * Detection rate of bacteria/drug-resistant bacteria on the wound and their correlation with the detection rate of bacterial biofilm. Participants will be randomized to experimental group or Control group, Prontosan Wound Irrigation Solution or normal saline will be extracted with syringe (Dosage 1-2ml/cm2), and the wound is rinsed 1 cm from the wound. Then, Prontosan wound irrigation solution or normal saline is used to saturate the gauze, and the gauze is applied to the wound for 15 minutes. After removing the gauze, cover it with oil gauze, then cover it with 8 layers of gauze and wrap it with a bandage.
Interventions
After debridement surgery, the test group is selected according to the randomization number of enrollment. For experimental group, Prontosan Wound Irrigation Solution is extracted with syringe (Dosage 1-2ml/cm2), and the wound is rinsed 1 cm from the wound. Then, Prontosan wound irrigation solution is used to saturate the gauze, and the gauze is applied to the wound for 15 minutes. After removing the gauze, cover it with oil gauze, then cover it with 8 layers of gauze and wrap it with a bandage.
DEVICENormal Saline
After debridement surgery, the test group is selected according to the randomization number of enrollment. For control group, normal saline is extracted with syringe (Dosage 1-2ml/cm2), and the wound is rinsed 1 cm from the wound. Then, normal saline is used to saturate the gauze, and the gauze is applied to the wound for 15 minutes. After removing the gauze, cover it with oil gauze, then cover it with 8 layers of gauze and wrap it with a bandage.
Sponsors
Shenzhen Second People's Hospital
Fujian Medical University Union Hospital
The First Hospital of Jilin University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* 1\. Voluntarily sign the informed consent form; * 2\. ≥18 years old; * 3\. Patients with chronic wound, eg. burns, and pressure injuries with stage 3 and 4. Diabetes foot ulcer with Wagner grade 2; (Staging and Wagner grading of stress injury can be found in attachments 1 and 2); * 4\. The length and width of a single wound in the wound area where the sampling point is located must be ≥2 cm, and the maximum length and width must be ≤10 cm; * 5\. The rapid smear test results of bacteria on the wound were positive; * 6\. The clinical symptoms of wound infection meet the following conditions: skin infection level scale score (SIRS) ≥ 8; * 7\. Patients identified by the investigator as having biofilm formation on the wound; * 8\. No eschar covering the wound surface.
Exclusion criteria
* 1\. Patients administered with systemic antibiotics 48 hours before enrollment; * 2\. Patients with severe autoimmune diseases; * 3\. Patients with pressure injuries classified as Stage I and II; (Please refer to Attachment 1 for for pressure injury staging); * 4\. Diabetes foot ulcer with Wagner grade0- 1 and more than 3; (Wagner grading of stress injury can be found in attachments 2); * 5\. Female in pregnancy or lactation period; * 6\. Those who have participated in clinical trials of drugs or devices within one month before the first treatment; * 7\. Patients who are allergic to any component of the research device; * 8\. Those who are currently using tumor chemotherapy drugs during screening; * 9\. Any condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, may increase the risk to the subjects or otherwise affect the evaluation of efficacy.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Difference in scoring the positive rate of bacterial biofilm before the first treatment and on the 7th day of treatment in Group A and Group B | Day0, Day7 | Difference in scoring the positive rate of bacterial biofilm=the total score of 3 tissues before treatment- the total score of 3 tissues treatment after 7days. To compare the score difference between 2 groups after the difference is calculated. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Positive detection rate of bacterial biofilm in group and group B before the first treatment, and on the 3rd and 7th day of treatment, and difference of the positive detection rate of biofilm among the two groups | Day0, Day3,Day7 | If any of the 3 samples is tested positive for the biofilm, the result will be judged positive (+); If no biofilm is detected in the 3 samples, the result will be judged negative (-). |
| 4-phase typing of bacterial biofilm detected in Group A, Group B and Group C before the first treatment, and on the 3rd and 7th day of treatment, and the proportion difference of 4-phase typing of biofilm among the two groups | Day0, Day3,Day7 | Typing I: 0 point is scored in case of free bacteria, i.e., dispersed phase of monomer bacteria; Typing II: 0 points are scored in case of bacterial adhesion, i.e., aggregation phase of monomer bacteria; Typing III&IV: 3 points are scored in case of mature bacterial biofilm, i.e., closed phase of colony bacteria; 3 points are scored in case of spreading of bacterial biofilm, i.e., open phase of colony bacteria. |
| Wound healing rate | Day0, Day3,Day7 | The wound is covered with sterile mesh film before the first treatment, and on the 3rd and 7th day of treatment, the wound area is measured and recorded, and the difference in wound healing rate among the two groups is compared. |
| Difference in scoring the positive rate of bacterial biofilm before the first treatment and on the 3rd day of treatment in Group A and Group B | Day0, Day3 | Difference in scoring the positive rate of bacterial biofilm=the total score of 3 tissues before treatment- the total score of 3 tissues treatment after 3 days. To compare the score difference between 2 groups after the difference is calculated |
| Distribution of inflammatory cells on the wound | Day0, Day3,Day7 | The H-E staining pathological sections of inflammatory cells on the wound are carried out before the first treatment, and on the 3rd and 7th day of treatment to compare the differences in the distribution type (Monocytes/Neutrophils/Lymphocytes) and quantity(No infiltration, mild infiltration, moderate infiltration, severe infiltration) of inflammatory cells on the wound among the two groups. mild infiltration refers to the infiltration of less than or equal to 10 inflammatory cells； moderate infiltration refers to the infiltration of 11-50 inflammatory cells; severe infiltration refers to the infiltration of more than 50 inflammatory cells. |
| Detection rate of bacteria/drug-resistant bacteria on the wound and their correlation with the detection rate of bacterial biofilm | Day0, Day3,Day7 | According to the test results, the number of bacteria positive cases and number of drug-resistant positive bacteria cases are counted, and the difference in anti-infection ability of the two groups after 3 and 7 days of wound treatment is compared by the number of positive cases/total number of burn patients in each group and the number of drug-resistant bacteria positive cases/total number of burn patients in each group. |
| Skin Infection Rating Scale (SIRS) score | Day0, Day3,Day7 | o Skin Infection Rating Scale (SIRS) scoring is conducted and recorded before the first treatment, and on the 3rd and 7th day of treatment to compare the differences of SIRS scores among the two groups. SIRS scoring Items include Exudate / pus, Scabbing, Erythema/Inflammation, Tissue edema, Tissue fever, Pruritus and Pain. The scores of every items are 0=none, 1=mild, 2= Moderate, 3= severe. |
Countries
China
Contacts
Primary ContactJia'ao Yu, Professor
Backup ContactXinxin Gao, Ph.D.
Outcome results
None listed