EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

RCT to evaluate a hyaluronic acid containing gauze pad in leg ulcers of venous or mixed aetiology



RCT to evaluate a hyaluronic acid containing gauze pad in leg ulcers of venous or mixed aetiology



Journal of Wound Care 21(11): 539-42, 544, 546-7



To investigate the efficacy and safety of an hyaluronic acid (HA)-impregnated gauze pad compared with a hydrocolloid (HC) dressing, in patients with leg ulcer of venous or mixed aetiology. A 56-day blind-observer, randomised, multicentre, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Patients were randomised to receive either an HA gauze pad (ialuset gauze pad) or an HC dressing (DuoDERM E).The primary endpoint was the difference between the groups regarding the percentages of patients achieving a reduction of at least 40% of the initial wound surface after 56 days of treatment (visit 5). Secondary endpoints included reduction of wound area, aspect of the wound (percentage of necrotic,fibrinous or granulation tissue), rate of complete ulcer healing, pain intensity, and clinical status of the peri-ulcerous skin. In total, 170 patients were included and analysed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population; 27 patients presented at least one major protocol deviation and were excluded from the per-protocol (PP) population.Therefore, 143 patients constituted the PP population (n=72 and n=71 in the HA gauze pad group and HC dressing group, respectively).At day 56, the confidence interval of the difference between the two groups for the percentage of patients with a reduction of at least 40% of the target ulcer initial surface was [-0.128; 0.164] with a lower limit above the non-inferiority threshold (-0.15). Peri-ulcerous skin was significantly less impaired in the HA gauze pad group for oedema at day 56 (p = 0.04), purpura at day 14 (p = 0.009) and for maceration at day 14 (p = 0.003). Other secondary endpoints were not significantly different between the two groups. Overall, both treatments were well tolerated and adverse events were comparable between the two groups regarding their pattern, frequency, likely relationship to treatment and severity which was mostly mild (grade I) or moderate (grade 2). These results were confirmed in the overall ITT population. These data support the non-inferiority of the HA gauze pad compared with HC for the primary endpoint.The significant differences in favour of HA gauze pad regarding peri-ulcerous skin changes (oedema, purpura and maceration) may suggest a trend for HA gauze pad to have a better acceptability than the reference HC dressing. This study was sponsored by Laboratoires Genévrier. Authors received honoraria for their contributions to the study, but have no other conflicts of interests to declare.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 055333886

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 23413492

DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2012.21.11.539



Related references

Efficacy and safety of a gauze pad containing hyaluronic acid in treatment of leg ulcers of venous or mixed origin: a double-blind, randomised, controlled trial. International Wound Journal 10(2): 159-166, 2013

Efficacy and tolerance of a hydrocolloid dressing containing hyaluronic acid for the treatment of leg ulcers of venous or mixed origin. Current Medical Research and Opinion 24(10): 2729-2739, 2008

Clinical verification of the use of topical hyaluronic acid under non-adhesive gauze in the therapy of torpid ulcers. Giornale Italiano di Dermatologia E Venereologia 118(4): Xli-Xliv, 1983

Pain in pure and mixed aetiology venous leg ulcers: a three-phase point prevalence study. Journal of Wound Care 12(9): 336-340, 2003

Hepascore and hyaluronic acid as markers of fibrosis in liver disease of mixed aetiology. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 27(3): 313-320, 2015

A controlled study of the activity of hyaluronic acid in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. Journal of Dermatological Treatment 7(2): 75-81, 1996

Comparative study of the activity of hyaluronic acid and dextranomer in the treatment of leg ulcers of venous origin. Annales de Dermatologie et de Venereologie Suppl: 13-16, 2001

Trophic effects of polynucleotides and hyaluronic acid in the healing of venous ulcers of the lower limbs: a clinical study. International Wound Journal 13(5): 754-758, 2014

Venous Ulcers Treated With a Hyaluronic Acid Extracellular Matrix and Compression Therapy: Interim Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial. Wounds 29(7): E51-E54, 2017

Comparison of a hydrocolloid dressing and paraffin gauze in the treatment of venous ulcers. British Journal of Dermatology 118(3): 425-428, 1988

Unna boot central gauze technique for chronic venous leg ulcers. Dermatology Online Journal 23(1), 2017

Multicenter clinical trial on the performance and tolerability of the Hyaluronic acid-collagenase ointment for the treatment of chronic venous ulcers: a preliminary pilot study. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences 17(20): 2721-2727, 2014

Cost effectiveness of using carboxymethylcellulose dressing compared with gauze in the management of exuding venous leg ulcers in Germany and the USA. Current Medical Research and Opinion 21(1): 81-92, 2005

Aetiology of venous ulcers. British Journal of Surgery 78(1): 120-120, 1991

Mixed aetiology ulcers. Journal of Wound Care 10(1): 520-520, 2003