PubMed · 13826897
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
L E GAUL. 1960. Sensitivity to bithionol.. https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.1960.03730040104019
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
UNLABELLED: Burn sepsis is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in patients with major burns. The use of topical anti-microbial agents has helped improve the survival in these patients. There are a number of anti-microbials available, one of which, Silvazine (1% silver sulphadiazine (SSD) and 0.2% chlorhexidine digluconate), is used only in Australasia. No study, in vitro or clinical, had compared Silvazine with the new dressing Acticoat. This study compared the anti-microbial activity of Silvazine, Acticoat and 1% silver sulphadiazine (Flamazine) against eight common burn wound pathogens. METHODS: Each organism was prepared as a suspension. A 10 microl inoculum of the chosen bacterial isolate (representing approximately between 10(4) and 10(5) total bacteria) was added to each of four vials, followed by samples of each dressing and a control. The broths were then incubated and 10 microl loops removed at specified intervals and transferred onto Horse Blood Agar. These plates were then incubated for 18 hours and a colony count was performed. RESULTS: The data demonstrates that the combination of 1% SSD and 0.2% chlorhexidine digluconate (Silvazine) results in the most effective killing of all bacteria. SSD and Acticoat had similar efficacies against a number of isolates, but Acticoat seemed only bacteriostatic against E. faecalis and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Viable quantities of Enterobacter cloacae and Proteus mirabilis remained at 24h. CONCLUSION: The combination of 1% SSD and 0.2% chlorhexidine digluconate (Silvazine) is a more effective anti-microbial against a number of burn wound pathogens in this in vitro study. A clinical study of its in vivo anti-microbial efficacy is required.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The aim of this study was to investigate in vitro the antimicrobial activity of 0.2%, 1%, and 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX gel and CHX liquid), against endodontic pathogens and compare the results with the ones achieved by 0.5%, 1%, 2.5%, 4%, and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl). A broth dilution test was performed, and the timing for irrigants to kill microbial cells was recorded and statistically analyzed. Both 2.0% gel and liquid formulations eliminated Staphylococcus aureus and Candida albicans in 15 seconds, whereas the gel formulation killed Enterococcus faecalis in 1 minute. All tested irrigants eliminated Porphyromonas endodontalis, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and Prevotella intermedia in 15 seconds. The timing required for 1.0% and 2.0% CHX liquid to eliminate all microorganisms was the same required for 5.25% NaOCl. The antimicrobial action is related to type, concentration, and presentation form of the irrigants as well as the microbial susceptibility.