Comparison of two wound dressings after laser skin resurfacing

Abstract

Background. It has been reported that the final outcome of laser resurfacing still depends to a large degree on the efficiency of the post laser resurfacing wound care in promoting wound healing and preventing early and late complications.

Objective. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare a new hydrocolloid dressing, H2460, with Flexzan^TM for healing of an acute wound after laser skin resurfacing (LSR).

Methods. Ten volunteers received LSR of the peri‐orbital area with an erbium:YAG laser. Identical parameters were used on both sides: 2 J, 5 mm spot, 8 Hz, 300 µs pulse, two passes on the upper eyelids, four passes on the lower eyelids and six passes on the crow's feet area. Soon after the LSR, one side was covered with Flexzan dressing and the other side was covered with a new hydrocolloid dressing – H2460. The side of the dressing was randomized by alternating both dressings. All volunteers were evaluated and digitally photographed every day for a week and at 1 month after LSR. The degree of erythema, swelling, bleeding, oozing, crusting, pigmentary changes, scarring, discomfort, itching, burning, ease of application of dressings, initial adhesion, overall adhesion, leakage of fluid, maceration of surrounding skin, ease of removal and adhesive residue upon removal were documented.

Results. In all volunteer and investigator's evaluations, the new dressing, H2460, achieved far better results than Flexzan in each category. After a 1‐week follow‐up all volunteers and the investigator evaluated the H2460 side as: healed better, simple to use, and caused less discomfort in 10 out of 10 volunteers. The blinded observer's assessment showed that the Flexzan side healed better in one volunteer.

Conclusion. The new dressing, H2460, is a better and suitable alternative to Flexzan as a post LSR dressing.

• Laser skin resurfacing
• wound healing
• hydrocolloid dressings