Hermans MHE. Porcine xenografts vs. (cryopreserved) allografts in the management of partial thickness burns: is there a clinical difference?
Burns 2013;
40:408-15. [PMID:
24018214 DOI:
10.1016/j.burns.2013.08.020]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2013] [Revised: 08/15/2013] [Accepted: 08/17/2013] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
Porcine xenografts and cryopreserved allografts are used for the management of partial thickness burns and both biological materials have strong advocates with regard to clinical performance, the possibility of disease transfer from donor to recipient and other clinical aspects. A literature analysis was performed in an attempt to investigate whether true (statistically significant) differences exist on clinical performance and on other determinants for use. Comparing the results of this study with a similar, previously published study performed on possible differences amongst different types of allograft in the management of partial thickness burns, both allografts and porcine xenograft seem to perform equally well clinically with regard to healing related outcomes. In addition, the risk of disease transfer, in real life, was shown to be minimal. Consequently, clinical aspects being equal, other aspects such as price and availability should be used to decide which material to use for the management of partial thickness burns.
Collapse