Long-term skin quality and scar formation after enzymatic debridement of deep-dermal burn wounds: A follow-up comparative study of Suprathel® and Jelonet®
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advances in burn care have highlighted the benefits of enzymatic debridement in reducing long-term scarring by preserving viable dermal structures. Nexobrid®, a bromelain-based enzymatic debridement agent, has become an established treatment modality for deep-dermal burns, particularly of the hand, due to its selective action and tissue-sparing properties. After debridement, the choice of dressing critically influences inflammation, re-epithelialization, and ultimately scar quality and skin function. In clinical practice, Suprathel®, a synthetic copolymer membrane, and Jelonet®, a paraffin-impregnated gauze, are widely used. While Suprathel® offers improved pain control and patient comfort, Jelonet® remains a cost-effective standard. Building on our previous intra-individual trial, which showed similar healing times but greater patient comfort with Suprathel®, this planned single-center, prospective long-term follow-up aims to address the lack of data on long-term scar quality and skin barrier function after enzymatic debridement. It includes the same 23 patients with deep-dermal hand burns who had received wound coverage with both Suprathel® and Jelonet® on comparable wound areas, assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months using objective instruments (Cutometer®, Mexameter®, Tewameter®, O2C®) and subjective scales (Vancouver Scar Scale, Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale). Both dressings resulted in favorable and largely comparable scar outcomes over 12 months, with no significant differences in elasticity, perfusion, or overall clinical scar appearance. Subtle yet statistically significant differences in transepidermal water loss (p < 0.01) and pigmentation (p < 0.01) indicated a trend toward enhanced epidermal barrier restoration and reduced hypopigmentation in Suprathel®-treated areas, although these effects did not translate into perceptible clinical advantages. These results confirm that both Suprathel® and Jelonet® are effective options for post-enzymatic debridement wound coverage, showing comparable long-term scar outcomes. The choice may reasonably depend on clinical workflow and dressing-management preferences, with Suprathel® remaining the standard in our burn center due to its reduced frequency of dressing changes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".