Burns Unit

Melbourne, Australia

Burns Unit

Melbourne, Australia
SEARCH FILTERS
Time filter
Source Type

Petruzzo P.,HCL Inc | Petruzzo P.,University of Cagliari | Testelin S.,Service de Chirurgie Maxillofaciale et Stomatologie | Kanitakis J.,Hopital Edouard Herriot | And 9 more authors.
Transplantation | Year: 2012

Background. The first human facial allotransplantation, a 38-year-old woman, was performed on November 27, 2005. The aesthetic aspect and functional recovery and the risk-to-benefit ratio are evaluated 5 years later. Materials and Methods. The facial transplantation included nose, chin, part of cheeks, and lips. The immunosuppressive protocol included tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, prednisone, and antithymocyte globulins. In addition, donor bone marrow cells were infused on days 4 and 11 after transplantation. Results. The aesthetic aspect is satisfying. The patient has normal protective and discriminative sensibility. She showed a rapid motion recovery, which has remained stable for 3 years posttransplantation. She can smile, chew, swallow, and blow normally whereas pouting and kissing is still difficult. Phonation recovery was impressive therefore the patient can talk normally. Two episodes of acute rejection developed during the first year. Donor-specific anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies were never detected. Five-year mucosal biopsy showed a slight perivascular inflammatory infiltrate while skin biopsy was normal. The main side effect of the immunosuppressive treatment was a progressive decrease in renal function, which improved after switching from tacrolimus to sirolimus. Moreover, she developed arterial hypertension, an increase in lipid levels, and in situ cervix carcinoma treated by conization. Since 2008, she showed mild cholangitis possibly caused by sirolimus. In September 2010, bilateral pneumopathy occurred and was successfully treated with antibiotics. Conclusion. Despite some long-term complications, which are similar to those reported after solid organ transplantation, the patient is satisfied of her new face and has normal social interaction. © 2012 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.


Trubiano J.A.,Monash University | Trubiano J.A.,Austin Health | Trubiano J.A.,Peter MacCallum Cancer Center | Trubiano J.A.,University of Melbourne | And 8 more authors.
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice | Year: 2016

Background: The difference in clinical presentation, causality assessments, and outcomes of patients with delayed antibiotic-associated cutaneous adverse drug reactions (AA-cADR) and nonantibiotic-associated (NA)-cADR is ill defined. Objective: We examined the etiology of AA-cADR, with regard to the type of antibiotic exposure, allergy labeling, and patient outcomes, in comparison with NA-cADR. Methods: A retrospective observational inpatient cohort study of cADR was performed from January 2004 to August 2014. Patients were divided into AA-cADR and NA-cADR groups for analysis. cADR was defined as erythema multiforme, fixed drug eruption, acute generalized erythematous pustulosis, drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), drug-associated linear IgA disease, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis. Results: Of the 84 patients with cADR, 48% were AA-cADR. Male sex (60% vs 32%, P = .004), median length of stay (14.5 vs 11 days, P = .05), median Charlson comorbidity index (3 vs 1, P = .03), and inpatient mortality (20% vs 5%, P = .04) were higher in AA-cADR compared with NA-cADR. The median drug latency was lower in AA-cADR (6 vs 20 days, P = .001). Sulfonamide antibiotics and glycopeptides were implicated in 20% of AA-cADR. DRESS was more frequently reported in AA-cADR. After cADR diagnosis, further antibiotic therapy was administered in 64% of patients, higher in AA-cADR (75%, 30 of 40) compared with NA-cADR (55%, 24 of 44) (P = .06). Fluoroquinolones (53% vs 21%, P = .02), glycopeptides (vancomycin and teicoplanin; 70% vs 38%, P = .05), and carbapenems (33% vs 13%, P = .11) were used more commonly in AA-cADR. Conclusions: Antibiotics were the cause of cADR requiring hospital admission in 48% of episodes, and were associated with longer length of stay, higher age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, shorter drug latency, and mortality. In AA-cADR, glycopeptide and sulfonamide antibiotic exposure predominated. © 2016 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology.


PubMed | Burns Unit and Monash University
Type: Journal Article | Journal: The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice | Year: 2016

The difference in clinical presentation, causality assessments, and outcomes of patients with delayed antibiotic-associated cutaneous adverse drug reactions (AA-cADR) and nonantibiotic-associated (NA)-cADR is ill defined.We examined the etiology of AA-cADR, with regard to the type of antibiotic exposure, allergy labeling, and patient outcomes, in comparison with NA-cADR.A retrospective observational inpatient cohort study of cADR was performed from January 2004 to August 2014. Patients were divided into AA-cADR and NA-cADR groups for analysis. cADR was defined as erythema multiforme, fixed drug eruption, acute generalized erythematous pustulosis, drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), drug-associated linear IgA disease, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis.Of the 84 patients with cADR, 48% were AA-cADR. Male sex (60% vs 32%, P= .004), median length of stay (14.5 vs 11 days, P= .05), median Charlson comorbidity index (3 vs 1, P= .03), and inpatient mortality (20% vs 5%, P= .04) were higher in AA-cADR compared with NA-cADR. The median drug latency was lower in AA-cADR (6 vs 20 days, P= .001). Sulfonamide antibiotics and glycopeptides were implicated in 20% of AA-cADR. DRESS was more frequently reported in AA-cADR. After cADR diagnosis, further antibiotic therapy was administered in 64% of patients, higher in AA-cADR (75%, 30 of 40) compared with NA-cADR (55%, 24 of 44) (P= .06). Fluoroquinolones (53% vs 21%, P= .02), glycopeptides (vancomycin and teicoplanin; 70% vs 38%, P= .05), and carbapenems (33% vs 13%, P= .11) were used more commonly in AA-cADR.Antibiotics were the cause of cADR requiring hospital admission in 48% of episodes, and were associated with longer length of stay, higher age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, shorter drug latency, and mortality. In AA-cADR, glycopeptide and sulfonamide antibiotic exposure predominated.


PubMed | National University of Malaysia and Burns Unit
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Journal of medical case reports | Year: 2016

Successful wound healing depends on various factors, including exudate control, prevention of microbial contaminants, and moisture balance. We report two cases of managing burn wounds with SMARTPORE Technology polyurethane foam dressing.In Case 1, a 2-year-old Asian girl presented with a delayed (11 days) wound on her right leg. She sustained a thermal injury from a hot iron that was left idle on the floor. Clinical inspection revealed an infected wound with overlying eschar that traversed her knee joint. As her parents refused surgical debridement under general anesthesia, hydrotherapy and wound dressing using SMARTPORE Technology Polyurethane foam were used. Despite the delay in presentation of this linear thermal pediatric burn injury that crossed the knee joint, the patients response to treatment and its outcome were highly encouraging. She was cooperative and tolerated each dressing change without the need of supplemental analgesia. Her wound was healed by 24 days post-admission. In Case 2, a 25-year-old Asian man presented with a mixed thickness thermal flame burn on his left leg. On examination, the injury was a mix of deep and superficial partial thickness burn, comprising approximately 3% of his total body surface area. SMARTPORE Technology polyurethane foam was used on his wound; his response to the treatment was very encouraging as the dressing facilitated physiotherapy and mobility. The patient rated the pain during dressing change as 2 on a scale of 10 and his pain score remained the same in every subsequent change. His wound showed evidence of epithelialization by day 7 post-burn. There were no adverse events reported.Managing burn wounds with SMARTPORE Technology polyurethane foam resulted in reduced pain during dressing changes and the successful healing of partial and mixed thickness wounds. The use of SMARTPORE Technology polyurethane foam dressings showed encouraging results and requires further research as a desirable management option in burn wounds.

Loading Burns Unit collaborators
Loading Burns Unit collaborators