Clinical trial NCT04014400: Suprathel Versus Xeroform for the Management of Skin Graft Donor Sites
Official title: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Suprathel Versus Xeroform for the Management of Pediatric and Adult Split Thickness Skin Graft Donor Sites
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: TERMINATED
Phase: NA
Conditions: Burns
Skin Graft Complications
Skin; Deformity
Keywords: skin graft
suprathel
xeroform
burn
donor site
Lead sponsor: University of Colorado, Denver
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: Children's Hospital Colorado
First posted: 2019-07-10
Enrollment: 10
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 31
Maximum age (years): 80
Standard ages: CHILD
ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: yes
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Primary purpose: TREATMENT

Brief summary: The investigators aim to study whether Suprathel, a synthetic temporary skin substitute developed by PolyMedics Innovations GmBH aids in the management of patient pain and wound healing when compared to the current standard dressing used of a primary Xeroform dressing.

Detailed description: Acute burn and donor site dressing changes are among the most traumatic and painful procedures performed on awake children and adults (7, 8). As a result, it is important to utilize dressings that: 1) stabilize open burn wounds and donor sites; 2) limit the frequency of dressing changes; 3) optimize burn wound and donor site healing; and 4) minimize scarring. Anecdotal evidence and a growing body of literature suggest that Suprathel may offer superior pain control and a decreased frequency of dressing changes, when compared to Xeroform.

At Children's Hospital Colorado, the standard of care is to use Xeroform to dress split thickness skin grafts and donor sites. Xeroform is an inexpensive, bacteriostatic, non-adherent petroleum gauze dressing that is supplied in strips, sheets and rolls. It is used to protect freshly skin grafted areas and donor sites, it is then covered with gauze followed by BandNet. When Xeroform is applied to a split thickness donor site, it adheres to the open wound bed, where it is allowed to dry out. As the donor site heals, the Xeroform begins to separate from the wound bed, until the Xeroform eventually sloughs off.

Suprathel is a biosynthetic dressing developed by PolyMedics Innovations in Germany. Potential advantages to the use of Suprathel include its water solubility, elongation capacity, and porosity, which prevents fluid accumulation at the burn site. In a prior study, Suprathel was associated with favorable burn scar formation (improved Vancouver Scar Scale Scores) and decreased pain with dressing changes. In another study, adolescent and adult burn patients dressed in Suprathel reported significantly less pain than those who were dressed in Mepilex dressings. In post-treatment surveys, patients preferred the use of Suprathel when compared to Mepitel. In a study that compared Suprathel to other standard burn dressings, there was no statistical difference in wound healing, scar formation, and epithelization. Given the limitations in sample size and scarce pediatric data in prior studies, further research is necessary to determine the efficacy of Suprathel in the pediatric population and whether this is a dressing material that should be offered to hospital patients.

New outpatients and inpatients who meet study inclusion criteria and require split-thickness skin grafting, will be randomized into the Suprathel group or the control group on the day of surgery. The investigators will use even calendar operative days for Suprathel and odd calendar operative days for Xeroform. Parental consent and/or patient assent will be obtained prior to the operative procedure.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* Children 31 days old -17 years old
* Have a burn injury or open wound of any percentage TBSA
* Require a skin graft

Exclusion Criteria:

* allergy to one of the dressings involved in the study,
* burn in close proximity to the donor site,
* the donor site has been harvested in a previous surgery,
* prisoners,
* children under the protection of the department of human services,
* pregnant women,
* those with impaired decision-making capacity.

Primary outcomes:
measure: Change in Pain as Assessed by Bieri Faces Scale
timeFrame: Weekly change in pain for 12 weeks
measure: Pain Before Dressing Change as assessed by r-FLACC
timeFrame: Weekly change in pain for 12 weeks
measure: Pain After Dressing Change as assessed by r-FLACC
timeFrame: Weekly change in pain for 12 weeks
measure: POSAS Scale Score
timeFrame: Weekly change in scar from 3rd week to 12 weeks
measure: Change in Pain as Assessed using Visual Analog Scale
timeFrame: Weekly change in pain for 12 weeks
measure: PROMIS Pain Interference Survey
timeFrame: Weekly change in pain interference for 12 weeks
measure: PROMIS Pain Interference Proxy Survey
timeFrame: Weekly change in pain interference for 12 weeks
measure: Pain Diary application (PainScale)
timeFrame: Day 1 through Day 7-10 Post-op
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Infection
timeFrame: 1 day (study visit) per week up to 12 weeks
measure: Cost of dressings
timeFrame: 12 weeks
measure: Heal time
timeFrame: 12 weeks
measure: re-epithelialization
timeFrame: 12 weeks
measure: Burn Itch Severity as assessed by Itch Man Scale
timeFrame: 12 weeks
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Aurora
country: United States
facility: Children's Hospital Colorado
state: Colorado
city: Aurora
country: United States
facility: University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
state: Colorado
Study officials:
affiliation: Children's Hospital Colorado
name: Steven Moulton, MD
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: Reed JL, Pomerantz WJ. Emergency management of pediatric burns. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2005 Feb;21(2):118-29. doi: 10.1097/01.pec.0000159058.95424.0d. No abstract available.
citation: Hundeshagen G, Collins VN, Wurzer P, Sherman W, Voigt CD, Cambiaso-Daniel J, Nunez Lopez O, Sheaffer J, Herndon DN, Finnerty CC, Branski LK. A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing the Outpatient Treatment of Pediatric and Adult Partial-Thickness Burns with Suprathel or Mepilex Ag. J Burn Care Res. 2018 Feb 20;39(2):261-267. doi: 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000584.
citation: Rashaan ZM, Krijnen P, Allema JH, Vloemans AF, Schipper IB, Breederveld RS. Usability and effectiveness of Suprathel(R) in partial thickness burns in children. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2017 Aug;43(4):549-556. doi: 10.1007/s00068-016-0708-z. Epub 2016 Jul 18.
citation: Kaartinen IS, Kuokkanen HO. Suprathel((R)) causes less bleeding and scarring than Mepilex((R)) Transfer in the treatment of donor sites of split-thickness skin grafts. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2011 Sep;45(4-5):200-3. doi: 10.3109/2000656X.2011.583515.
citation: Everett M, Massand S, Davis W, Burkey B, Glat PM. Use of a copolymer dressing on superficial and partial-thickness burns in a paediatric population. J Wound Care. 2015 Jul;24(7):S4-8. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2015.24.Sup7.S4.
citation: Hansbrough W, Dore C, Hansbrough JF. Management of skin-grafted burn wounds with Xeroform and layers of dry coarse-mesh gauze dressing results in excellent graft take and minimal nursing time. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1995 Sep-Oct;16(5):531-4. doi: 10.1097/00004630-199509000-00012.
citation: Gee Kee E, Kimble RM, Cuttle L, Stockton K. Comparison of three different dressings for partial thickness burns in children: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2013 Nov 25;14:403. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-403.
citation: Piatkowski A, Drummer N, Andriessen A, Ulrich D, Pallua N. Randomized controlled single center study comparing a polyhexanide containing bio-cellulose dressing with silver sulfadiazine cream in partial-thickness dermal burns. Burns. 2011 Aug;37(5):800-4. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2011.01.027. Epub 2011 Feb 23.
citation: Vloemans AF, Hermans MH, van der Wal MB, Liebregts J, Middelkoop E. Optimal treatment of partial thickness burns in children: a systematic review. Burns. 2014 Mar;40(2):177-90. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2013.09.016. Epub 2013 Nov 26.
citation: Markl P, Prantl L, Schreml S, Babilas P, Landthaler M, Schwarze H. Management of split-thickness donor sites with synthetic wound dressings: results of a comparative clinical study. Ann Plast Surg. 2010 Nov;65(5):490-6. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181d37624.
citation: Cunningham NR, Kashikar-Zuck S, Mara C, Goldschneider KR, Revicki DA, Dampier C, Sherry DD, Crosby L, Carle A, Cook KF, Morgan EM. Development and validation of the self-reported PROMIS pediatric pain behavior item bank and short form scale. Pain. 2017 Jul;158(7):1323-1331. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000914.
citation: Liu Y, Yuan C, Wang J, Brown JG, Zhou F, Zhao X, Shen M, Hinds PS. Comparability of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pediatric short form symptom measures across culture: examination between Chinese and American children with cancer. Qual Life Res. 2016 Oct;25(10):2523-2533. doi: 10.1007/s11136-016-1312-8. Epub 2016 May 10.
citation: Brandon TG, Becker BD, Bevans KB, Weiss PF. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Tools for Collecting Patient-Reported Outcomes in Children With Juvenile Arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2017 Mar;69(3):393-402. doi: 10.1002/acr.22937.
citation: Bieri D, Reeve RA, Champion DG, Addicoat L, Ziegler JB. The Faces Pain Scale for the self-assessment of the severity of pain experienced by children: development, initial validation, and preliminary investigation for ratio scale properties. Pain. 1990 May;41(2):139-150. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(90)90018-9.
citation: Baxt C, Kassam-Adams N, Nance ML, Vivarelli-O'neill C, Winston FK. Assessment of pain after injury in the pediatric patient: child and parent perceptions. J Pediatr Surg. 2004 Jun;39(6):979-83; discussion 979-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2004.02.031.
citation: Cummings EA, Reid GJ, Finley AG, McGrath PJ, Ritchie JA. Prevalence and source of pain in pediatric inpatients. Pain. 1996 Nov;68(1):25-31. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(96)03163-6.
citation: Busche MN, Thraen AJ, Gohritz A, Rennekampff HO, Vogt PM. Burn Scar Evaluation Using the Cutometer(R) MPA 580 in Comparison to "Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale" and "Vancouver Scar Scale". J Burn Care Res. 2018 Jun 13;39(4):516-526. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irx009.
citation: Highton L, Wallace C, Shah M. Use of Suprathel(R) for partial thickness burns in children. Burns. 2013 Feb;39(1):136-41. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2012.05.005. Epub 2012 Jun 13.
citation: Monstrey S, Hoeksema H, Verbelen J, Pirayesh A, Blondeel P. Assessment of burn depth and burn wound healing potential. Burns. 2008 Sep;34(6):761-9. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2008.01.009. Epub 2008 Jun 3.
citation: Voepel-Lewis T, Malviya S, Tait AR, Merkel S, Foster R, Krane EJ, Davis PJ. A comparison of the clinical utility of pain assessment tools for children with cognitive impairment. Anesth Analg. 2008 Jan;106(1):72-8, table of contents. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000287680.21212.d0.
citation: van der Wal MB, Tuinebreijer WE, Bloemen MC, Verhaegen PD, Middelkoop E, van Zuijlen PP. Rasch analysis of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) in burn scars. Qual Life Res. 2012 Feb;21(1):13-23. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9924-5. Epub 2011 May 20.
citation: Schwarze H, Kuntscher M, Uhlig C, Hierlemann H, Prantl L, Ottomann C, Hartmann B. Suprathel, a new skin substitute, in the management of partial-thickness burn wounds: results of a clinical study. Ann Plast Surg. 2008 Feb;60(2):181-5. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e318056bbf6.
citation: Beltramini A, Milojevic K, Pateron D. Pain Assessment in Newborns, Infants, and Children. Pediatr Ann. 2017 Oct 1;46(10):e387-e395. doi: 10.3928/19382359-20170921-03.
citation: Morris V, Murphy LM, Rosenberg M, Rosenberg L, Holzer CE 3rd, Meyer WJ 3rd. Itch assessment scale for the pediatric burn survivor. J Burn Care Res. 2012 May-Jun;33(3):419-24. doi: 10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182372bfa.