Go to page
 

Bibliographic Metadata

Title
Effects and safety of atmospheric low-temperature plasma on bacterial reduction in chronic wounds and wound size reduction : A systematic review and meta-analysis
AuthorAssadian, Ojan ; Ousey, Karen J. ; Daeschlein, Georg ; Kramer, Axel ; Parker, Christina ; Tanner, Judith ; Leaper, David J.
Published in
International Wound Journal, 2019, Vol. 16, Issue 1, page 103-111
PublishedWiley-Blackwell, 2019
LanguageEnglish
Document typeJournal Article
Keywords (EN)atmospheric lowtemperature plasma / bacterial reduction / cold atmospheric plasma / infection / physical plasma / wound / wound healing / wound tolerability
URNurn:nbn:at:at-ubmuw:3-815 Persistent Identifier (URN)
DOI10.1111/iwj.12999 
Restriction-Information
 The work is publicly available
Files
Effects and safety of atmospheric low-temperature plasma on bacterial reduction in chronic wounds and wound size reduction [1.45 mb]
Links
Reference
Classification
Abstract (English)

The use of atmospheric lowtemperature plasma (AP) on chronic wounds and its effect on microbial bioburden in open wounds has not been explored with a systematic review and metaanalysis. PRISMA guidelines were followed and PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which compared AP with no AP for the management of open, chronic wounds. The primary outcomes of reduction of bioburden or wound size were included. Metaanalyses were performed; odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and pooled in a random effects model.

Four RCTs investigated the effect of AP on chronic wound healing. Chronic wounds treated with AP did not show a significant improvement in healing (AP vs control: OR=1.46; 95% CI=0.892.38; P=0.13). Five further RCTs investigated the reduction of bioburden in wounds, but AP demonstrated no significant reduction of bioburden (AP vs control: OR=0.85; 95% CI=0.451.62; P=0.63). All nine RCTs recorded the presence of any severe adverse events (SAEs) in the 268 patients studied, with only one unrelated SAE identified in each group (AP vs control: OR= 1.00; 95% CI=0.0519.96; P=1.00). Use of AP in wound care is safe, but the retrieved evidence and metaanalysis show that there is no clinical benefit of AP in chronic open wounds using currently available AP device settings.

Stats
The PDF-Document has been downloaded 2 times.
License
CC-BY-NC-License (4.0)Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial 4.0 International License