International Wound Journal ISSN 1742-4801

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in experimentally induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns Meltem K Songur1 , Ovunc Akdemir2 , William C Lineaweaver3 , Turker Cavusoglu4 , Murat Ozsarac1 , Huseyin Aktug4 , Ecmel Songur2 & Yigit O Tiftikcioglu2 1 Department of Emergency Medicine, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey 2 Department of Plastic Surgery, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey 3 Department Of Plastic, Reconstructive And Aesthetic Surgery, Joseph M. Still Burn and Reconstructive Center, Brandon, MS, USA 4 Department of Histology and Embryology, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey

Key words Burn; Calcium gluconate; Epidermal growth factor; Hydrofluoric acid; Magnesium sulphate

Songur MK, Akdemir O, Lineaweaver WC, Cavusoglu T, Ozsarac M, Aktug H, Songur E, Tiftikcioglu YO. Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in experimentally induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns. Int Wound J 2014; doi: 10.1111/iwj.12214

Correspondence to O Akdemir, MD Department of Plastic Surgery Ege University Izmir 35040 Turkey E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract Hydrofluoric acid (HF) burns cause immediate damage and painful long-term sequellae. Traditionally, chelating agents have been used as the initial treatment for such burns. We have introduced epidermal growth factor (EGF) into an HF model to compare EGF with Ca2+ and Mg2+ treatments; 40 Sprague Dawley rats were divided into five groups. Each rat suffered a 6 × 4 cm2 burn induced by 40% HF. Group 1 had no treatment, group 2 had saline injected beneath the burn, group 3 received magnesium sulphate injections, group 4 received calcium gluconate and group 5 received EGF. Specimens were evaluated via planimetry and biopsy at intervals of 4, 8, 24 and 72 hours. Fluid losses were significantly less in the Mg2+ and EGF groups. The EGF group had the smallest burn area, least oedema, least polymorphonuclear granulocyte (PMN) infiltration, most angiogenesis and highest fibroblast proliferation of any group (P < 0·005). EGF limited HF damage morphologically and histologically more effectively than Ca2+ or Mg2+ . This finding indicates that HF treatment via growth factors may be an improvement over chelation therapy.

Introduction

Hydrofluoric acid (HF) is among the strongest inorganic acids. HF is used in petrochemical processes, glass etching and mineral processing (1–3). It is a frequent ingredient in household rust removers (3,4). The physiopathology of HF burns differs from that of other acid burns. Initially, like other inorganic acids, it has a corrosive effect on superficial tissues. Uniquely, the high permeability of fluoride ions leads to liquefaction necrosis, along with the decalcification and erosion of underlying bone (1,5). The literature on the treatment of HF skin burns describes the topical application of 2·05% calcium gluconate (6), subcutaneous injections of calcium gluconate and magnesium sulphate (7,8), intra-arterial calcium gluconate infusion (9,10), and intravenous magnesium sulphate infusion (5). The role of epidermal growth factor (EGF) in wound healing is well-known (11,12). Currently, research on the effect of EGF on burn wounds is very extensive (13). Although there have been many experimental articles about

the effects of EGF on thermal burn injuries, there have not been any articles about the effects of EGF on HF burn injuries.

Key Messages • hydrofluoric acid (HF) is among the strongest inorganic

acids • burn injury caused by HF is one of the most dangerous

burn types • literature on the treatment of HF skin burns describes

calcium gluconate and magnesium sulphate applications • our aim is to show the effects of epidermal growth factor

(EGF) on HF burn injury • we assessed the wound healing effects of calcium

gluconate, magnesium sulphate and EGF on HF burn injury by measuring histopathological parameters, burn areas and body weights

© 2014 The Authors International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd doi: 10.1111/iwj.12214

1

Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns

Current EGF applications related to wounds have led us to investigate its role in a HF burn model. In this study, the treatment of experimental chemical burn wounds created with 40% HF solutions with subcutaneous injections of EGF was compared to treatment with conventional calcium gluconate and magnesium sulphate injections.

Material and methods

Analysis of burned area (cm2 )

The wound area of the rats was photographed planimetrically from a 10 cm distance at 4, 8, 24 and 72 hours with a camera (Sony Cybershot DSC-T100, London, UK). The photographs obtained of the burn wound area from every rat were analysed with the Image-Pro Express program (Media Cybernetics Inc., Philadelphia,; Figure 1). Histopathological assessment

Forty male Sprague Dawley rats weighing between 350 and 400 g were used in this study. The National Research Council’s guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals were followed. The Ethical Committee of the Training and Research Hospital approved the experimental protocol. Animals were anaesthetised with an intraperitoneal injection of a combination of ketamine (100 mg/ml) and xylazine (20 mg/ml) at a total dose of 0·02 ml/100 g of body weight.

Experimental protocols

A 6 × 4 cm2 area of dorsal hair was removed with an electric shaver, and all procedures were performed under sterile conditions (14). A volume of 60 μl of 40% HF (VWR, Paris, France) was applied to each spot with a calibrated pipette and immediately spread over the delimited surface using a polypropylene stick. After 2 minutes of contact with HF, the skin was carefully blotted dry for 1 minute with a surgical towel (6). The rats were divided into five groups. For the first group (group 1, control, n = 8), no treatment was administered. For the second group (group 2, n = 8), 0·05 ml/cm2 saline was injected subcutaneously. For the third group (group 3, n = 8), 0·05 ml/cm2 calcium gluconate (Adeka Inc., Istanbul, Turkey) was injected subcutaneously (15). For the fourth group (group 4, n = 8), 0·05 ml/cm2 15% magnesium sulphate solution (Biofarma Inc., Istanbul, Turkey) was injected subcutaneously (8). For the fifth group (group 5, n = 8), 100 μ/kg recombinant human epidermal growth factor (rhEGF, Peprotech, London, UK) diluted with saline was injected (16). All applications were performed by blinded examiners. After the treatment, in all groups, the wound areas were covered with sterile, dry gauze containing no topical agents. Specially designed burn outfits were placed on the rats and stabilised to ensure that there would be no pressure on the wounds. For analgesia, 30 mg codeine phosphate and 500 mg paracetamol were added to every 500 ml of drinking water.

Body weight assessment

To assess the bodyweight loss of the rats, their wet weights at 0 hours (before burn) and 72 hours (post-burn) were measured with an electronic weighing machine (Electronic weighing system, Naugra Export, Ambala, India). Post-burn biopsies were weighed and added to the wet weight at 72 hours. Before all the rats were euthanised, their final weights were realised, and the related data were obtained. 2

M. K. Songur et al.

In all groups, 0·5 × 1 cm2 rectangular biopsies were obtained at 4 hours from the upper left corner, at 8 hours from the lower left corner, at 24 hours from the lower right corner and at 72 hours from the center of the burned area. These specimens were taken for histopathological examination at 4, 8, 24 and 72 hours. After the fixation of the skin tissue with 4% paraformaldehyde, 4-μ sections were sliced using a microtome. The sections were painted with haematoxylin and examined under a high-performance light microscope (×10, ×20 and ×100 magnifications) by two blinded examiners. According to modified Verhofstad scoring (17), the samples were examined based on the following seven parameters: neutrophil [polymorphonuclear granulocytes (PMN)], lymphocyte density, vascularity, fibroblast proliferation, the amount of oedema, collagen density and necrosis (Table 1). Statistical assessment

The statistical analysis of the obtained data was performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 14·00 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL) program. Data were analysed using the Kruskal–Wallis, Friedman, Wilcoxon and Mann–Whitney U -tests. P values 0·005). The bodyweight losses of groups 3 and 4 were statistically significantly higher than that in group 5 (P < 0·005, Figure 2). Results of burn area analysis

The average 4-hour data values were 23·03 cm2 in group 1, 23·02 cm2 in group 2, 17·04 cm2 in group 3, 21·06 cm2 in group 4 and 15·04 cm2 in group 5. According to the burned

© 2014 The Authors International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

M. K. Songur et al.

Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns

Figure 1 The evaluation of burn areas (A) at 0 hours and (B) at 8 hours with Image-Pro Express program.

area comparison, the data values in groups 1 and 2 were statistically significantly higher than those in the other groups (P < 0·005). The average value of group 4 was significantly higher than that of groups 3 and 5 (P < 0·005). The average value of group 3 was also statistically significantly higher than that of group 5 (P < 0·005). The average 8-hour data values were 22·06 cm2 in group 1, 22·04 cm2 in group 2, 16·05 cm2 in group 3, 19·07 cm2 in group 4 and 12·09 cm2 in group 5. According to the burned area comparison, the average data values in groups 1 and 2 were statistically significantly higher than those in the other

groups (P < 0·005). The average value of group 4 was significantly higher than those in groups 3 and 5 (P < 0·005). The average value of group 3 was also statistically significantly higher than that in group 5 (P < 0·005). The average 24-hour data values were 21·09 cm2 in group 1, 21·09 cm2 in group 2, 15·07 cm2 in group 3, 17·08 cm2 in group 4 and 10·08 cm2 in group 5. According to the burned area comparison, the average data values in groups 1 and 2 were statistically significantly higher than those in the other groups (P < 0·005). There was no statistically significant difference between groups 3 and 4 (P > 0·005). The average

© 2014 The Authors International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

3

M. K. Songur et al.

Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns Table 1 Histopathologic evaluation Verhofstad modified scoring table Score 0 1 2 3

Necrosis

PMN

Lymphocyte

Oedema

Collagen density

Fibroblast proliferation

Vascularity

None Superficial Pronounced Massive

Normal Light Pronounced Massive

Normal Light Pronounced Massive

None Light Pronounced Dense

None Light Pronounced Dense

None Light Pronounced Dense

None Light Pronounced Dense

PMN, polymorphonuclear granulocytes.

Figure 2 The bodyweight loss of the groups.

Results of pathological assessment

Figure 3 The distribution of burned areas by group based on time.

values of groups 3 and 4 were also statistically significantly higher than that of group 5 (P < 0·005). The average 72-hour data values were 21·02 cm2 in group 1, 21·02 cm2 in group 2, 14·04 cm2 in group 3, 16·04 cm2 in group 4 and 9·04 cm2 in group 5. According to the burned area comparison, the average values of groups 1 and 2 were statistically significantly higher than those in the other groups (P < 0·005). There was no statistically significant difference between groups 3 and 4 (P > 0·005). The average values of groups 3 and 4 were also statistically significantly higher than that of group 5 (P < 0·005, Figure 3). 4

All the groups were scored histopathologically according to the modified Verhofstad scoring system. According to the histopathological data at 4 hours, the results for PMN, lymphocytes, oedema, collagen density, fibroblast proliferation and vascularity showed that there were no statistically significant differences between groups (P > 0·005). Also, the necrosis results were not statistically significantly different among groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 (P > 0·005). However, the necrosis results of groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 were statistically significantly higher than that of group 5 (P < 0·005, Table 2). According to the histopathological data at 8 hours, the results for lymphocytes, oedema, collagen density, fibroblast proliferation and vascularity showed that there were no statistically significant differences between groups (P > 0·005). Also, the necrosis results were not statistically significantly different among groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 (P > 0·005). However, the necrosis results of groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 were statistically significantly higher than those of group 5 (P < 0·005). The PMN results of groups 1 and 2 were statistically significantly higher than those of the other groups (P < 0·005). The fibroblast proliferation results of group 5 were statistically significantly higher than those of the other groups (P < 0·005, Table 3). According to the histopathological data at 24 hours, the results for vascularity showed that there were no statistically significant differences between groups (P > 0·005). The

© 2014 The Authors International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

M. K. Songur et al.

Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns

Table 2 The comparison of histopathological data among groups at 4 hours*,† Group Control group Sham group Calcium group Magnesium group EGF group

Necrosis

PMN

Lymphocyte

Oedema

Collagen density

Fibroblast proliferation

Vascularity

2·87 ± 0·35 2·87 ± 0·35 2·5 ± 0·53 2·75 ± 0·46 1·25 ± 0·46

0 0·12 ± 0·35 0·12 ± 0·35 0·25 ± 0·46 0

0·12 ± 0·35 0 0 0 0

1·37 ± 0·51 1·5 ± 0·53 2·12 ± 0·6 2·12 ± 0·6 1·37 ± 0·74

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0·37 ± 0·51

0 0 0 0 0

EGF, epidermal growth factor; PMN, polymorphonuclear granulocytes. *Neutrophil (PMN). †±Standard deviation (SD). Table 3 The comparison of histopathological data among groups at 8 hours*,† Group Control group Sham group Calcium group Magnesium group EGF group

Necrosis

PMN

Lymphocyte

Oedema

Collagen density

Fibroblast proliferation

Vascularity

2·75 ± 0·46 2·87 ± 0·35 2·5 ± 0·53 2·75 ± 0·46 1·12 ± 0·35

1·12 ± 0·35 1·12 ± 0·35 0·12 ± 0·35 0·25 ± 0·46 0

0·12 ± 0·35 0·12 ± 0·35 0·12 ± 0·35 0·25 ± 0·46 0

1·37 ± 0·51 1·5 ± 0·53 2·12 ± 0·6 2·12 ± 0·6 1·37 ± 0·74

0 0 0 0 0·37 ± 0·51

0 0 0·12 ± 0·35 0·12 ± 0·35 1

0 0 0 0 0

EGF, epidermal growth factor; PMN, polymorphonuclear granulocytes. *Neutrophil (PMN). †±Standard deviation (SD).

necrosis results for groups 1, 2 and 5 were statistically significantly higher than those of groups 3 and 5 (P < 0·005). Also, the necrosis results for group 3 were statistically significantly higher than those of group 5 (P < 0·005). The PMN results for groups 1 and 2 were statistically significantly higher than those of the other groups (P < 0·005). The PMN results for group 4 were statistically significantly higher than those of groups 3 and 5 (P < 0·005). The lymphocyte results for groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 were statistically significantly higher than those of group 5 (P < 0·005). Also, the oedema results for groups 3 and 4 were statistically significantly higher than those of group 5 (P < 0·005). The collagen density results for group 5 were statistically significantly higher than those of the other groups (P < 0·005). The fibroblast proliferation results for group 5 were statistically significantly higher than those of the other groups (P < 0·005). The fibroblast proliferation results of groups 3 and 4 were statistically significantly higher than those of groups 1 and 2 (P < 0·005, Table 4). At 72 hours, the EGF group showed a statistically significantly lower rate of necrosis, neutrophils, lymphocytes and oedema (P < 0·005), while collagen density, fibroblast proliferation and vascularity were increased significantly as

compared with the other groups (P < 0·005). In the calcium group, at 72 hours, the necrosis rate, neutrophils, lymphocytes and oedema were not statistically significantly different from those in the magnesium group (P > 0·005). The neutrophils, lymphocytes and oedema results of the control and sham groups were statistically significantly different from those of the calcium and magnesium groups (P < 0·005). However, the neutrophils, lymphocytes and oedema results of the calcium and magnesium groups were statistically significantly different from those of the EGF group (P < 0·005). The collagen density, fibroblast proliferation and vascularity results for the calcium and magnesium groups were statistically significantly different from those of the control and sham groups (P < 0·005). However, the collagen density, fibroblast proliferation and vascularity results of the EGF group were statistically significantly different from those of the other groups (P < 0·005, Table 5).

Discussion

Many growth factors are involved in the processes of normal wound healing. Growth factors have therefore been proposed

Table 4 The comparison of histopathological data among groups at 24 hours*,† Group Control group Sham group Calcium group Magnesium group EGF group

Necrosis

PMN

Lymphocyte

Oedema

Collagen density

Fibroblast proliferation

Vascularity

2·37 ± 0·51 2·5 ± 0·53 1·87 ± 0·64 2·25 ± 0·46 1·12 ± 0·35

1·37 ± 0·51 1·37 ± 0·51 0·12 ± 0·35 0·75 ± 0·88 0·12 ± 0·35

1·25 ± 0·46 1·25 ± 0·46 1 ± 0·75 1·25 ± 0·46 0·25 ± 0·46

2·5 ± 0·53 2·37 ± 0·74 1·62 ± 0·51 1·62 ± 0·51 1 ± 0·53

0·25 ± 0·46 0·25 ± 0·46 0·62 ± 0·51 0·37 ± 0·51 1·5 ± 0·53

0·37 ± 0·51 0·37 ± 0·51 1·25 ± 1·03 1·25 ± 1·03 2·37 ± 0·74

0 0 0 0 0·37 ± 0·51

EGF, epidermal growth factor; PMN, polymorphonuclear granulocytes. *Neutrophil (PMN). †±Standard deviation (SD). © 2014 The Authors International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

5

M. K. Songur et al.

Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns Table 5 The comparison of histopathological data among groups at 72 hours*,† Group Control group Sham group Calcium group Magnesium group EGF group

Necrosis

PMN

Lymphocyte

Oedema

Collagen density

Fibroblast proliferation

Vascularity

2·37 ± 0·51 2·5 ± 0·53 1·62 ± 0·51 1·75 ± 0·7 1

2·25 ± 0·46 2·25 ± 0·46 0·62 ± 0·74 0·75 ± 0·88 0·12 ± 0·35

1·87 ± 0·64 1·87 ± 0·64 1·12 ± 0·64 1·5 ± 0·53 0·25 ± 0·46

1·75 ± 0·46 2 ± 0·53 1·25 ± 0·7 1·25 ± 0·7 1 ± 0·53

0·5 ± 0·53 0·37 ± 0·51 1·62 ± 0·91 1·25 ± 1·03 2·75 ± 0·46

0·75 ± 0·7 0·62 ± 0·74 1·62 ± 1·06 1·37 ± 1·06 2·62 ± 0·74

0·37 ± 0·51 0·37 ± 0·51 1·62 ± 0·74 1·45 ± 0·7 2·62 ± 0·51

EGF, epidermal growth factor; PMN, polymorphonuclear granulocytes. *Neutrophil (PMN). †±Standard deviation (SD).

Figure 4 Histopathological images of all groups at 72 hours. The yellow arrow shows oedema. The blue arrow shows collagen density. The red arrow shows vessels. The epithelial damage and oedema have been increased in groups 1 and 2. Epithelial thickness and collagen density have been increased in groups 3, 4 and 5. Vascularity has been increased in group 5 [haematoxylin and eosin (H&E), ×20 magnification].

as therapeutic agents to promote wound repair (18–22). EGF is a polypeptide composed of 53 amino acids. It was first isolated from the mouse submaxillary gland by Stanley Cohen in 1962 as part of his Nobel Prize winning work with growth factors (19). The investigation of the role of exogenous EGF in acute wound healing began as early as 1973 with in vivo models of corneal epithelial hyperplasia after injury in response to topical EGF (23). Enhanced wound healing has also been noted in dermal wounds treated with topical or subcutaneous EGF (24). Franklin and Lynch recorded faster epithelial regeneration and less scar contracture in EGF-treated wounds in rabbits (25). With the introduction of recombinant human EGF in the 1980s, the range of studies increased to include burn wounds. EGF is secreted by platelets, macrophages, monocytes and fibroblasts and acts in an autocrine and paracrine manner on epidermal cells, smooth muscle cells and fibroblasts. Specifically, EGF interacts with its receptor across the 6

entire epidermis, particularly in the basal layer, promoting epithelial growth through the activation of several pathways. The binding of EGF to its receptor, results in the prompt dimerization and autophosphorylation of the latter. This process activates the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway, ultimately affecting the phosphorylation of numerous transcription factors and calcium release via activated protein kinase C. EGF also promotes epidermal regeneration and corneal epithelialisation via a number of actions. Such actions include enhancing epithelial cell proliferation and migration to the wound, stimulating the production of proteins such as fibronectin, and increasing the number of fibroblasts in the wound (26). Studies with partial-thickness human burn wounds and topical EGF confirmed a decrease in wound healing time (27). In thermal wound models in rats, it has been shown that EGF is effective, but the healing effect on chemical

© 2014 The Authors International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

M. K. Songur et al.

Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns

burns is not known (25,27). Wang SL et al. investigated the acceleration of burn wound healing with the use of pomades containing rhEGF and found a significant acceleration of burn wound healing (28). Alemdero˘glu et al. studied the effect of kitosan gel combined with EGF on experimental seconddegree burn wounds on rats. In the group in which the kitosan gel and the EGF were combined, faster and better epithelisation was observed (29). In our study, we also found that the epithelisation of burn areas was faster and better with EGF applications. Isabelle Robin et al. treated experimental burn areas created on rats with 40% HF solutions by using 2·05% calcium gluconate gel and observed successful wound healing in 17 days. Topical therapy with 2·05% calcium gluconate gel is considered to be the first-aid treatment for accidental HF skin burns (6). Seyb et al. studied subcutaneous injections of magnesium and calcium salts in the treatment of HF burns and had better results than were seen with the conventional topical treatments (7). For this reason, magnesium sulphate, calcium gluconate and EGF were applied subcutaneously in our study. In our opinion, the subcutaneous application of EGF affects wounds both locally and systemically. The works described above have shown that angiogenesis begins and collateral veins start to enlarge after 24 hours and that 3–7 days are required for the smallest capillary enlargement (30). Therefore, histopathological assessment was performed in our study to understand the changes in vascularity, oedema, collagen density, fibroblast proliferation and polymorphic nuclear leucocyte inflammatory activity, which are very important in wound healing. After 72 hours, there were no statistically significant differences between the parameters of the calcium gluconate and magnesium sulphate groups. However, parameters such as collagen density, fibroblast proliferation and vascularity, which demonstrated wound healing, were statistically significantly higher in the EFG group than in the other groups (Figure 4). In addition to reduced oedema and necrosis, there are signs that fibroblast and collagen depositions are higher in EGF-treated animals. This shows that wound healing is started early by EGF and that the harmful effects of HF are prevented by EGF. Williams et al. compared the effectiveness of intravenous magnesium and that of intradermal calcium gluconate treatment in HF burns in rats. For third-degree burns, high-dose intravenous magnesium is more effective than intradermal calcium gluconate. High-dose IV magnesium sulphate reduces the severity of HF burns as compared with conventional intradermal calcium gluconate therapy (5). Wang LF et al. evaluated the effect of calcium- and magnesium-containing biological dressings and isotonic saline dressings on experimental HF burns in rats planimetrically and histopathologically at 4, 8, 24 and 72 hours. As a result, they proposed the use of such biological dressings containing calcium and magnesium in the emergency room or after the treatment of HF burns (31). Our study has shown that the histopathological results of the magnesium and calcium groups were statistically significantly better than those of the control and sham groups. In light of these findings, the calcium and magnesium groups, which were using some of the cheapest burn injury treatment methods, would be beneficial when used on

hydrofluoric burn injuries. However, these methods are not more effective than EGF. The major reason for bodyweight loss after a burn is fluid loss (32). In this study, to evaluate the body weight of rats with the experimental burns caused by 40% HF, the animals were weighed at 0 and 72 hours, and the authors observed a significant prevention of bodyweight loss in the EGF-treated group (P < 0·005). These results have shown us that EGF is beneficial in terms of preventing fluid loss. All rats reached for the water, but the rats that had lost a greater amount of body weight had very slow movements. If the experiments had lasted another week, the rats could have faced mortality.

Conclusion

Industrial development and the extensive use of chemicals containing HF, both in factories and household applications, have increased the number of patients with HF burns. In the literature on the treatment of burns caused by this potent acid, there are few alternatives. The effects of calcium gluconate and magnesium sulphate have been proven. The authors believe that employing EGF in the first stage of HF burn treatment will be useful. The disadvantage of EGF use is its high price and the difficulty involved in obtaining it. In the absence of EGF, the use of magnesium and calcium sulphate is the treatment of choice.

Acknowledgement

Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest and did not receive any funding or grant.

References

© 2014 The Authors International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

1. Chick LR, Borah G. Calcium carbonate gel therapy for hydrofluoric acid burns of the hand. Plast Reconstr Surg 1990;86:935–40. 2. DeFranzo AJ. Principles and management of injuries from chemical and physical agents. In: Georgiade GS, Georgiade NG, Riefkohl R, Barwick WJ, editors. Textbook of plastic, maxillofacial and reconstructive surgery. Philadelphia: Williams and Wilkins co, 1992:253–6. 3. Rubinfeld RS, Silbert DI, Arentsen JJ, Laibson PR. Ocular hydrofluoric acid burns. Am J Ophtalmol 1992;114:420–3. 4. Burkhart KK, Brent JB, Kirk MA, Baker DC, Kulig K. Comparison of topical magnesium and calcium treatment for dermal hydrofluoric acid burns. Ann Emerg Med 1994;24:9–13. 5. Williams JM, Hammand A, Cottington EC, Harchelroad FC. Intravenous magnesium in the treatment of hydrofluoric acid burns in rats. Ann Emerg Med 1994;23(3 Suppl):464–9. 6. Roblin I, Urban M, Flicoteau D, Martin C, Pradeau D. Topical treatment of experimental hydrofluoric acid skin burns by 2.5% calcium gluconate. J Burn Care Res 2006;27:889–94. 7. Seyb ST, Noordhoek L, Botens S, Mani MM. A study to determine the efficacy of treatments for hydrofluoric acid burns. J Burn Care Res 1995;16(3 Suppl):253–7. 8. Harris JC, Rumack BH, Bregman DJ. Comparative efficacy of injectable calcium and magnesium salts in the therapy of hydrofluoric acid burns. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 1981;18(9 Suppl):1027–32. 9. Hatzifotis M, Williams A, Muller M, Pegg S. Hydrofluoric acid burns. Burns 2004;30:156. 7

Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns

10. D¨unser MW, Ohlbauer M, Rieder J, Zimmermann I, Ruatti H, Schwabegger AH, Bodrogi F, Huemer GM, Friesenecker BE, Mayr AJ, Lirk P. Critical care management of major hydrofluoric acid burns: a case report, review of the literature, and recommendations for therapy. Burns 2004;30:391. 11. Brown GL, Curtsinger L 3rd, Brightwell JR, Ackerman DM, Tobin GR, Polk HC Jr, George-Nascimento C, Valenzuela P, Schultz GS. Enhancement of epidermal regeneration by biosynthetic epidermal growth factor. J Exp Med 1986;163(5 Suppl):1319–24. 12. Nanney LB. Epidermal and dermal effects of epidermal growth factor during wound repair. J Invest Dermatol 1990;94(5 Suppl):624–9. 13. Wenczak BA, Lynch JB, Nanney LB. Epidermal growth factor receptor distribution in burn wounds. J Clin Invest 1992:2392–401. 14. Hult´en P, H¨ojer J, Ludwigs U, Janson A. Hexafluorine vs. standard decontamination to reduce systemic toxicity after dermal exposure to hydrofluoric acid. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 2004;42(4 Suppl):355–61. 15. Dowbak G, Rose K, Rohrich RJ. A biochemical and histologic rationale for the treatment of hydrofluoric acid burns with calcium gluconate. J Burn Care Rehabil 1994;15(4 Suppl):323–7. 16. Bonkobara M, Boonrit T, Onda K, Matsuki N, Inaba M, Ono K. Effects of epidermal growth factor on maternal and fetal serum amino acid levels in rats. J Vet Med Sci 1997;59(11 Suppl):1053–6. 17. Akdemir O, Hede Y, Zhang F, Lineaweaver WC, Arslan Z, Songur E. Effects of taurine on reperfusion injury. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2011;64(7 Suppl):921–8. 18. Bertolini JC. Hydrofluoric acid: a review of toxicity. J Emerg Med 1992;10:163–8. 19. Dibbell DG, Iverson RE, Jones W, Laub DR, Madison MS. Hydrofluoric acid burns of the hand. J Bone Joint Surg 1970;52:931–6. 20. Anderson WJ, Anderson JR. Hydrofluoric acid burns of the hand: mechanism of injury and treatment. J Hand Surg Am 1988;13:52–7. 21. Kirkpatrick JJ, Burd DA. An algorithmic approach to the treatment of hydrofluoric acid burns. Burns 1995;21(7 Suppl):495–9.

8

M. K. Songur et al.

22. Greenhalgh D. The role of growth factors in wound healing. J Trauma 1996;41:159–67. 23. Cohen S. Isolation of a mouse submaxillary gland protein accelerating incisor eruption and eye-lid opening in the new-born animal. J Biol Chem 1962;237:1555–62. 24. Savage C, Cohen S. Proliferation of corneal epithelium induced by epidermal growth factor. Exp Eye Res 1973;15:361. 25. Starkey R, Cohen S, Orth D. Epidermal growth factor: identification of a new hormone in human urine. Science 1975;189:800–2. 26. Tiaka EK, Papanas N, Manolakis AC, Georgiadis GS. Epidermal growth factor in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: an update. Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther 2012;24(1 Suppl):37–44. 27. Franklin J, Lynch J. Effects of topical application of epidermal growth factor on wound healing. Plast Reconstr Surg 1979;64:766–70. 28. Wang SL, Ma JL, Chai JK. Acceleration of burn wound healing with topical application of recombinant human epidermal growth factor ointments. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi 2002; 16(3 Suppl):173–6. 29. Alemdaro˘glu C, De˘gim Z, Celebi N, Zor F, Ozt¨urk S, Erdo˘gan D. An investigation on burn wound healing in rats with chitosan gel formulation containing epidermal growth factor. Burns 2006;32(3 Suppl):319–27. 30. Zhang F, Waller W, Lineaweaver WC. Growth factor and flap survival. Microsurgery 2004:162–7. 31. Wang LF, Hu GL, Zhang ZJ, Ba T, Rong ZD, Wang H, Zhang J, Cao SJ, Zhang GH. The efficacy of biological dressing containing calcium and magnesium on the management of hydrofluoric acid burns. Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi 2007; 23(1 Suppl):49–51. 32. Cioffi WG. What’s new in burns and metabolism. J Am Coll Surg 2001;192(2 Suppl):241–54.

© 2014 The Authors International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Comparison of skin effects of immediate treatment modalities in experimentally induced hydrofluoric acid skin burns.

Hydrofluoric acid (HF) burns cause immediate damage and painful long-term sequellae. Traditionally, chelating agents have been used as the initial tre...
1MB Sizes 2 Downloads 3 Views