Superficial Partial-Thickness Burn Study

Superficial Partial Thickness Burn Clinical Trial

Official title:

Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing a Novel Glycopolymer Compound in the Treatment of Superficial Partial-thickness Burns

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Terminated

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT04601532
• Other study ID #: STUDY20050205
• Status: Terminated
• Phase: Phase 4
• Start date: June 11, 2021
• Est. completion date: December 8, 2022

Study information

• Verified date: January 2024
• Source: University of Pittsburgh
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

This study is an investigator initiated, single site, University of Pittsburgh, prospective, parallel group, randomized controlled trial comparing SynePure Wound Cleanser and Catasyn Advanced Technology Hydrogel (intervention group) to the current gold standard treatment Silvadene (control group). Both groups will receive the same care other than the treating agent. Subjects will be recruited form the UPMC Mercy Burn Center adult patient pool who have sustained superficial partial-thickness burn wounds that comprise less than or equal to 10% of total body surface area (TBSA)

Description:

Current effective dressings for burn wounds contain silver (nanoparticulate or ionic), hypochlorite, hydrogen peroxide, sulfa agents, chlorhexidine, iodine or other dilute antiseptics meant to provide some measure of antimicrobial protection. However, all of these materials have some proven limitations in facilitating wound healing and also have notable local and systemic adverse effects. None of the current clinical treatments enhance healing and/or reduce scar formation. The purpose of this study is to test the safety and effectiveness of SynePure™ Wound Cleanser when used in combination with Catasyn™ Advanced Technology Hydrogel for the treatment of superficial partial-thickness burn wounds.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Terminated
• Enrollment: 26
• Est. completion date: December 8, 2022
• Est. primary completion date: December 8, 2022
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Ability to provide informed consent

• 18 years of age or older, male and female

• Patients who have sustained superficial, partial-thickness burn wounds = to 10% of total body surface area (TBSA)

• Patients otherwise in good general physical and mental health, as per the investigator's clinical judgment

Exclusion Criteria:

• Inability to provide informed consent

• Deep partial-thickness burns and full-thickness burns

• Radiation, chemical, or electrical burn injury

• Patients with burns primarily located to the face, genitals, or span across joints

• Patients whose burn injury was = to 48 hours prior to entry into the UPMC Mercy Burn Center Clinic.

• Patients with uncontrolled cerebrovascular disease, cardiovascular disease, endocrine disease, hepatic disease, or renal disease; or other severe conditions for whom, in the physician investigators' discretion, would render study participation unsafe

• Patients with documented or self-reported shellfish allergies

• Current pregnancy

• Patients with concurrent burn related injuries or inhalation injury that would put the patient at increased risk, per physician discretion

• Any condition to which in the investigator's discretion would render study enrollment a safety concern for the patient

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Burns
• Superficial Partial Thickness Burn

Intervention

Device:
• Catasyn™ Advanced Technology Hydrogel and SynePure™ Wound Cleanser
Catasyn™ Advanced Technology Hydrogel is a wound hydrogel that provides a moist wound environment. A moist wound environment is supportive to wound healing. SynePure™ Wound Cleanser is a non-cytotoxic wound cleanser for the removal of foreign material from epidermal and dermal wounds, burns, cuts, abrasions and minor irritations of the skin.

Drug:
• Silver Sulfadiazine
Silver sulfadiazine, a sulfa drug, is used to prevent and treat infections in burn wounds.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
United States	UPMC Mercy Hospital	Pittsburgh	Pennsylvania

Sponsors (3)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
J. Peter Rubin, MD	Synedgen, Inc., United States Department of Defense

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

References & Publications (18)

Aurora A, Beasy A, Rizzo JA, Chung KK. The Use of a Silver-Nylon Dressing During Evacuation of Military Burn Casualties. J Burn Care Res. 2018 Jun 13;39(4):593-597. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irx026. — View Citation

Aziz Z, Abu SF, Chong NJ. A systematic review of silver-containing dressings and topical silver agents (used with dressings) for burn wounds. Burns. 2012 May;38(3):307-18. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2011.09.020. Epub 2011 Oct 24. — View Citation

Barajas-Nava LA, Lopez-Alcalde J, Roque i Figuls M, Sola I, Bonfill Cosp X. Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing burn wound infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 6;(6):CD008738. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008738.pub2. — View Citation

Baryza MJ, Baryza GA. The Vancouver Scar Scale: an administration tool and its interrater reliability. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1995 Sep-Oct;16(5):535-8. doi: 10.1097/00004630-199509000-00013. — View Citation

Cheak-Zamora NC, Wyrwich KW, McBride TD. Reliability and validity of the SF-12v2 in the medical expenditure panel survey. Qual Life Res. 2009 Aug;18(6):727-35. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9483-1. Epub 2009 May 8. — View Citation

Church D, Elsayed S, Reid O, Winston B, Lindsay R. Burn wound infections. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2006 Apr;19(2):403-34. doi: 10.1128/CMR.19.2.403-434.2006. — View Citation

Draaijers LJ, Tempelman FR, Botman YA, Tuinebreijer WE, Middelkoop E, Kreis RW, van Zuijlen PP. The patient and observer scar assessment scale: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004 Jun;113(7):1960-5; discussion 1966-7. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000122207.28773.56. — View Citation

Duran N, Duran M, de Jesus MB, Seabra AB, Favaro WJ, Nakazato G. Silver nanoparticles: A new view on mechanistic aspects on antimicrobial activity. Nanomedicine. 2016 Apr;12(3):789-799. doi: 10.1016/j.nano.2015.11.016. Epub 2015 Dec 24. — View Citation

Elliott D; Bluebelle Study Group. Developing outcome measures assessing wound management and patient experience: a mixed methods study. BMJ Open. 2017 Nov 26;7(11):e016155. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016155. — View Citation

Li-Tsang CW, Lau JC, Liu SK. Validation of an objective scar pigmentation measurement by using a spectrocolorimeter. Burns. 2003 Dec;29(8):779-84. doi: 10.1016/s0305-4179(03)00165-7. — View Citation

Maruish M. User's manual for the SF-12v2 Health Survey. 3. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Inc.; 2012.

Narayanaswamy VP, Giatpaiboon SA, Uhrig J, Orwin P, Wiesmann W, Baker SM, Townsend SM. In Vitro activity of novel glycopolymer against clinical isolates of multidrug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. PLoS One. 2018 Jan 17;13(1):e0191522. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191522. eCollection 2018. — View Citation

Narayanaswamy VP, Keagy LL, Duris K, Wiesmann W, Loughran AJ, Townsend SM, Baker S. Novel Glycopolymer Eradicates Antibiotic- and CCCP-Induced Persister Cells in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Front Microbiol. 2018 Aug 3;9:1724. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01724. eCollection 2018. — View Citation

Nherera L, Trueman P, Roberts C, Berg L. Silver delivery approaches in the management of partial thickness burns: A systematic review and indirect treatment comparison. Wound Repair Regen. 2017 Aug;25(4):707-721. doi: 10.1111/wrr.12559. Epub 2017 Aug 17. — View Citation

Oliveira GV, Chinkes D, Mitchell C, Oliveras G, Hawkins HK, Herndon DN. Objective assessment of burn scar vascularity, erythema, pliability, thickness, and planimetry. Dermatol Surg. 2005 Jan;31(1):48-58. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4725.2005.31004. — View Citation

Sullivan T, Smith J, Kermode J, McIver E, Courtemanche DJ. Rating the burn scar. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1990 May-Jun;11(3):256-60. doi: 10.1097/00004630-199005000-00014. — View Citation

van de Kar AL, Corion LU, Smeulders MJ, Draaijers LJ, van der Horst CM, van Zuijlen PP. Reliable and feasible evaluation of linear scars by the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005 Aug;116(2):514-22. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000172982.43599.d6. — View Citation

Wasiak J, Cleland H. Burns: dressings. BMJ Clin Evid. 2015 Jul 14;2015:1903. — View Citation

* Note: There are 18 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Number of Days to Healing of the Superficial Partial Thickness Burn Wound.	Number of days to healed burn wound (re-epithelialization as defined by greater than or equal to 90% epithelialized wound, determined by investigator exam and review of wound photographs, as needed)	up to 21 days
Primary	Change From Screening Visit to Visit 8 in Total Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) Score	The patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) is used to measure scar quality. It is composed of a patient reported section and an observer reported section (6 scored items each). Each section consists of items on a ten-step scale (1= as normal skin to 10=very different from normal skin/worst scar imaginable). A higher score indicates more symptoms/issues present; the lower the score the closer to normal skin. These sections are then summed together to make up the total score (maximum of 120 and minimum of 12). Please note the means listed denote the difference in POSAS score between the baseline and last assessment completed (21 days if last visit completed, or earlier visit if withdrawn or lost to follow up).	up to 21 days
Secondary	Safety- Infection Rate From Screening Visit to Visit 8	Safety as measured by total incidences of infection from screening visit to visit 8, or to last visit completed, for the three lost to follow up participants, and 1 participant who was withdrawn.	up to 21 days
Secondary	Safety- Rate of Noted Wound Progression From Screening Visit to Visit 8	Safety as measured by total incidence of progression of burn wounds to deep partial thickness/full thickness from screening visit to visit 8, or to last visit completed, for the three lost to follow up participants, and 1 participant who was withdrawn.	up to 21 days
Secondary	Safety- Rate of Complications From Screening Visit to Visit 8	Safety as measured by rate of adverse event/complication that resulted in a change to the participant's treatment course from initial standard of care from screening visit to visit 8, or to last visit completed, for the three lost to follow up participants, and 1 participant who was withdrawn.	up to 21 days
Secondary	Safety- as Measured by Change in Total Vancouver Scar Scale Score From Screening Visit to Visit 8, or to Last Visit Completed, for the Three Lost to Follow up Participants, and 1 Participant Who Was Withdrawn.	Vancouver Scar Scale Score: The VSS is a scale to assess the extent of scarring for a given wound by scoring the pigmentation, vascularity, pliability and height of the scar. Each domain is individually scored then the domains are summed to give a total score that range from zero (0) to 13 with zero (0) representing a 'normal' presentation. Validity and reliability of the scale have been documented and is commonly used in wound healing research. The means listed represent the difference in total score from baseline to 21 days, or from baseline to last assessment, if participant did not complete the 21 day visit.	up to 21 days