Linked Life Data

3546711

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/3546711

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
2
pubmed:dateCreated
1987-4-21
pubmed:abstractText
During the past 2 years a multicenter study was performed comparing Biobrane (Woodroof) and frozen cadaver allograft as temporary dressings on freshly excised full-thickness burns before the application of autograft. Each biologic dressing was evaluated with respect to the other on the same patient. Seventy-one patients were evaluated. The mean burn size was 35 +/- 20% with a mean full-thickness burn of 28 +/- 20%. Mean patient age was 34 +/- 21 years. Overall survival was 82%. The mean time of wound coverage was 10.2 +/- 6.7 days. There was no significant difference in the number of dressing changes, area changed, purulence, autograft take, and final results between allograft- and Biobrane-covered sites. There were no complications following use of either Biobrane or allograft. We conclude that Biobrane is as effective as frozen human cadaver allograft for the temporary coverage of freshly excised full-thickness burn wounds before autografting.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
AIM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Feb
pubmed:issn
0022-5282
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
27
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
N
pubmed:pagination
155-7
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1987
pubmed:articleTitle
Biosynthetic skin substitute versus frozen human cadaver allograft for temporary coverage of excised burn wounds.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study