Use of a hydrogel dressing for management of a painful leg ulcer.

Morecambe Bay Primary Care Trust, Cumbria.
British journal of community nursing 07/2006; 11(6):S12, S14, S16-7. DOI: 10.12968/bjcn.2006.11.Sup3.21212
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This case study is of an 82-year-old lady who was widowed and lives alone in a council house. A left lateral leg ulcer had developed over the gaiter area, and the community team were asked to assess in 2004. The main issues were her inability to tolerate compression (even when reduced) because of the pain. Nevertheless, the community nurses had tried very hard with compression, using different compression techniques at different times to try to encourage her to persevere. The nurses felt they were running out of ideas and therefore the tissue viability nurse (TVN) was asked to assess the wound. The TVN recommended ActiFormCool dressing. This article will examine the background for wound healing, provide the rational for the recommendation and describe the progress of the patient.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many drug delivery systems (DDSs) have been investigated for local targeting of malignant disease with the intention of increasing anti-tumor activity and minimizing systemic toxicity. An injectable thermosensitive hydrogel was applied to prevent locoregional recurrence of 4T1 breast cancer in a mouse model. The presented hydrogel, which is based on poly(ethyleneglycol)-poly(ε-caprolactone)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG-PCL-PEG, PECE), flows freely at normal temperature, forms a gel within seconds in situ at body temperature, and eventually releases the drug in a consistent and sustained fashion as it gradually biodegrades. Locoregional recurrence after primary tumor removal was significantly inhibited in mice treated with the paclitaxel (PTX)-loaded PECE hydrogel subcutaneously (9.1%) administered, compared with the blank hydrogel (80.0%), systemic (77.8%) and locally (75.0%) administered PTX, and the control group (100%) (P < 0.01). In addition, tensile strength measurements of the surgical incisions showed that the PECE hydrogel accelerates wound healing at postoperative day 7 (P < 0.05), and days 4 and 14 (P > 0.05), in agreement with histopathological examinations. This novel DDSs represents a promising approach for local adjuvant therapy in malignant disease.
    Nanoscale 08/2012; 4(18):5686-93. DOI:10.1039/c2nr30731f · 6.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The variety of wound types has resulted in a wide range of wound dressings with new products frequently introduced to target different aspects of the wound healing process. The ideal dressing should achieve rapid healing at reasonable cost with minimal inconvenience to the patient. This article offers a review of the common wound management dressings and emerging technologies for achieving improved wound healing. It also reviews many of the dressings and novel polymers used for the delivery of drugs to acute, chronic and other types of wound. These include hydrocolloids, alginates, hydrogels, polyurethane, collagen, chitosan, pectin and hyaluronic acid. There is also a brief section on the use of biological polymers as tissue engineered scaffolds and skin grafts. Pharmacological agents such as antibiotics, vitamins, minerals, growth factors and other wound healing accelerators that take active part in the healing process are discussed. Direct delivery of these agents to the wound site is desirable, particularly when systemic delivery could cause organ damage due to toxicological concerns associated with the preferred agents. This review concerns the requirement for formulations with improved properties for effective and accurate delivery of the required therapeutic agents. General formulation approaches towards achieving optimum physical properties and controlled delivery characteristics for an active wound healing dosage form are also considered briefly. © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc. and the American Pharmacists Association J Pharm Sci 97: 2892–2923, 2008
    Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 08/2008; 97(8):2892 - 2923. DOI:10.1002/jps.21210 · 3.01 Impact Factor