Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23740764›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013

Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing burn wound infection.

Leticia A Barajas-Nava, Jesús López-Alcalde, Marta Roqué i Figuls, Ivan Solà, Xavier Bonfill Cosp

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04601532 (Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing a Novel Glycopolymer Compound in the Treatment of Superficial Partial-thickness Burns), which is not on this map. Cited by 60 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
14.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04601532 phase4terminatednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing a Novel Glycopolymer Compound in the Treatment of Superficial Partial-thickness Burns

TypeinterventionalSponsorJ. Peter Rubin, MDRan2021 to 2022Enrolled26ConditionsSuperficial Partial Thickness BurnArmsCatasyn™ Advanced Technology Hydrogel and SynePure™ Wound Cleanser, Silver Sulfadiazine
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 184 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [S3 guideline on sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and follow-up care-update 2025].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. [S3 Guideline Sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and aftercare : Long version].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2020
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Antiseptics for burns.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Review
  10. Managing skin infections in burn patients: principles and pitfalls.Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Multidrug-Resistant Organisms: The Silent Plight of Burn Patients.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Leticia A Barajas-NavaIberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Institute of Biomedical Research (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain. leticia.barajas@cochrane.es.
Jesús López-Alcalde
Marta Roqué i Figuls
Ivan Solà
Xavier Bonfill Cosp
Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ES

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInfection of burn wounds is a serious problem because it can delay healing, increase scarring and invasive infection may result in the death of the patient. Antibiotic prophylaxis is one of several interventions that may prevent burn wound infection and protect the burned patient from invasive infections.

objectivesTo assess the effects of antibiotic prophylaxis on rates of burn wound infection. SEARCH

methodsIn January 2013 we searched the Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE - In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (2013); Ovid EMBASE; EBSCO CINAHL and reference lists of relevant articles. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of BWI. Quasi-randomised studies were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted relevant data. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) were estimated for dichotomous data and continuous data, respectively. When sufficient numbers of comparable RCTs were available, trials were pooled in a meta-analysis to estimate the combined effect. MAIN

resultsThis review includes 36 RCTs (2117 participants); twenty six (72%) evaluated topical antibiotics, seven evaluated systemic antibiotics (four of these administered the antibiotic perioperatively and three administered upon hospital admission or during routine treatment), two evaluated prophylaxis with non absorbable antibiotics, and one evaluated local antibiotics administered via the airway.The 11 trials (645 participants) that evaluated topical prophylaxis with silver sulfadiazine were pooled in a meta analysis. There was a statistically significant increase in burn wound infection associated with silver sulfadiazine compared with dressings/skin substitute (OR = 1.87; 95% CI: 1.09 to 3.19, I(2) = 0%). These trials were at high, or unclear, risk of bias. Silver sulfadiazine was also associated with significantly longer length of hospital stay compared with dressings/skin substitute (MD = 2.11 days; 95% CI: 1.93 to 2.28).Systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in non-surgical patients was evaluated in three trials (119 participants) and there was no evidence of an effect on rates of burn wound infection. Systemic antibiotics (trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole) were associated with a significant reduction in pneumonia (only one trial, 40 participants) (RR = 0.18; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.72) but not sepsis (two trials 59 participants) (RR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.12 to 1.61).Perioperative systemic antibiotic prophylaxis had no effect on any of the outcomes of this review.Selective decontamination of the digestive tract with non-absorbable antibiotics had no significant effect on rates of all types of infection (2 trials, 140 participants). Moreover, there was a statistically significant increase in rates of MRSA associated with use of non-absorbable antibiotics plus cefotaxime compared with placebo (RR = 2.22; 95% CI: 1.21 to 4.07).There was no evidence of a difference in mortality or rates of sepsis with local airway antibiotic prophylaxis compared with placebo (only one trial, 30 participants). AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe conclusions we are able to draw regarding the effects of prophylactic antibiotics in people with burns are limited by the volume and quality of the existing research (largely small numbers of small studies at unclear or high risk of bias for each comparison). The largest volume of evidence suggests that topical silver sulfadiazine is associated with a significant increase in rates of burn wound infection and increased length of hospital stay compared with dressings or skin substitutes; this evidence is at unclear or high risk of bias. Currently the effects of other forms of antibiotic prophylaxis on burn wound infection are unclear. One small study reported a reduction in incidence of pneumonia associated with a specific systematic antibiotic regimen.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisBandagesBurnsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSilver SulfadiazineSkin, ArtificialTrimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug CombinationWound InfectionAnti-Bacterial AgentsSilver SulfadiazineTrimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination

Identifiers

PMID23740764
PMCPMC11303740
OpenAlexW1926539100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.