Clinical Comparative Trial of a Modified Polyurethane Dressing and Aquacel

January 25, 2010 updated by: Klinik Bogenhausen
The almost single disadvantage of conventional polyurethane film dressings, an uncontrolled leakage, is probably as often described as its numerous advantages for split-thickness skin graft (STSG) donor sites. This shortcoming can be overcome by perforating the polyurethane dressing (MPD), which permits a controlled leakage into a secondary absorbent dressing. The study was conducted to compare the MPD-system and Aquacel® (ConvaTec), a hydrofiber wound dressing, which also seems to fulfill all criteria of an ideal donor site dressing.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Bavaria
      • Munich, Bavaria, Germany, 81925
        • Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, Hand and Burn Surgery, Academic Hospital Munich Bogenhausen, Technical University Munich

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

N/A

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • skin graft donor site anterolateral thigh
  • men and women > 18 years

Exclusion Criteria:

  • informed consent missing
  • repeated skin graft take or prior injury at the observed site
  • Subject unlikely to comply with protocol, e.g., uncooperative attitude, inability to return for follow-up visits, and unlikelihood of completing the study
  • History of hypersensitivity to the investigational products

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
reepithelialization rate
Time Frame: 10th day postoperative
10th day postoperative

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
pain, scar formation, complications (e.g. infection), costs
Time Frame: pain until and during dressing removal, scar formation 60 days following surgery
pain until and during dressing removal, scar formation 60 days following surgery

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 25, 2010

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 25, 2010

First Posted (Estimate)

January 26, 2010

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

January 26, 2010

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 25, 2010

Last Verified

January 1, 2010

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • MPV-AQUACEL

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Reepithelialization of Skin Graft Donor Sites

Clinical Trials on modified polyurethane film dressing (OpSite, Smith&Nephew, London, UK)

3
Subscribe