Microdacyn for wound cleansing

Severe leg ulcers, pressure ulcers and diabetic foot cause great suffering for the affected and is associated with a large cost for the healthcare system. These wounds are difficult to treat and there is no consensus on best treatment. Microdacyn, formerly Dermacyn, is marketed as "an effective agent for the care and healing of chronic wounds, diabetic foot, burns, eye infection, viruses and fungi." and is approved as a Class IIB medical device product.

Question

What scientific studies are there on Microdacyn and Dermacyn for wound treatment?

Identified literature

Table 1. Systematic reviews with low/medium risk of bias.

Included studies Population/Intervention Outcome
Norman et al, 2017 [1]
Inclusion criteria: Published and unpublished randomised controlled trails (RCTs). Studies using quasi-randomisation were excluded.

Included studies: Search resulted in 629 unique records. 59 were included in the qualitative synthesis and 50 were included in the meta-analysis. Only 1 of the included studies tested super-oxidised water (Dermacyn)
Population: All patients (both adults and children) undergoing elective or emergency surgery where (1) an incision is being made to form an open wound; or (2) an operative procedure to treat an existing wound.

Intervention: Intraoperative washout, either wound irrigation or intracavity lavage.
Primary outcomes: Surgical site infection (SSI).
Wound dehiscence (wound reopening) within 30 days of operation.

Secondary outcomes:
30-day mortality
Use of systemic antibiotics
Infections that show antibiotic resistance
Adverse events
Surgical re‐intervention rates
Mean length of hospital stay
Hospital readmissions.
Authors' conclusion:
“There may be more infections in wounds irrigated with povidone iodine compared with Dermacyn. The RR for Mohd 2010 was 2.80 (95% CI, 1.05 to 7.47; 190 participants). This would represent an absolute difference of 95 more SSIs per 1000 people treated with povidone iodine than with superoxidised water (95% CI, 3 more to 341 more). This was low‐certainty evidence downgraded once for risk of bias and once for imprecision.”

References

Norman G, Atkinson RA, Smith TA, Rowlands C, Rithalia AD, Crosbie EJ, et al. Intracavity lavage and wound irrigation for prevention of surgical site infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;10:Cd012234.

SBU Enquiry Service Consists of structured literature searches to highlight studies that can address questions received by the SBU Enquiry Service from Swedish healthcare or social service providers. We assess the risk of bias in systematic reviews and when needed also quality and transferability of results in health economic studies. Relevant references are compiled by an SBU staff member, in consultation with an external expert when needed.

Published: 6/29/2020
Contact SBU: registrator@sbu.se
Report no: ut202029
Registration no: SBU 2020/177