Comparing the use of a novel antibiotic‐free film‐forming topical wound dressing versus a topical triple antibiotic in dermatologic surgical procedures including Mohs micrographic surgery.

Background: There is no universally accepted protocol of topical wound care after cutaneous surgical procedures. The current practice is to use petrolatum‐based products, commonly containing topical antibiotics. The rise in antibiotic‐resistant bacteria and increased risk of allergic and contact dermatitis due to the use of topical antibiotics is well established. Objective: To compare the prevalence of contact dermatitis, the infection rate and the subjective measures of healing of a novel, antibiotic‐free, film‐forming silicone‐based wound dressing to a topical triple antibiotic petrolatum‐based ointment in patients undergoing invasive dermatological interventions in two arms: (1) Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) and (2) a combination of various routine dermatologic surgical procedures. Design: The 231 patients were enrolled in this open‐label, randomized, single‐blinded study. Patients applied the products immediately after surgery and daily afterwards. Clinicians evaluated the surgical site for infection or contact dermatitis at all follow‐up visits. Acute wound healing progression was assessed using a rating scale against clinical experience and expected results from −4 (much worse) to +4 (much better). Results: Contact dermatitis was significantly decreased in the wound dressing group compared to the topical antibiotic group (0 vs 15.9%, P < 0.001). There was no difference between the study arms (Mohs vs. non‐Mohs, P = 0.242). Infection rate was not significantly different between the groups (P > 0.05) and between the study arms (P > 0.05). Assessor‐rated secondary outcomes like healing time, healing quality, erythema and new tissue quality were significantly better in the wound dressing group, while comfort and perceived overall satisfaction were better in the antibiotic group. Patient‐rated outcomes did not show any difference between groups and between study arms. Conclusion: The wound dressing used in this study is a topical silicone gel preparation and presents a viable alternative to topical antibiotics for postoperative wound care without enhancing the risk of infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology & Venereology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)