豆丁微信公众号
君，已阅读到文档的结尾了呢~~
柴油发电机组简介
扫扫二维码，随身浏览文档
手机或平板扫扫即可继续访问
柴油发电机组简介
举报该文档为侵权文档。
举报该文档含有违规或不良信息。
反馈该文档无法正常浏览。
举报该文档为重复文档。
推荐理由：
将文档分享至：
分享完整地址
文档地址：
粘贴到BBS或博客
flash地址：
支持嵌入FLASH地址的网站使用
html代码：
&embed src='http://www.docin.com/DocinViewer--144.swf' width='100%' height='600' type=application/x-shockwave-flash ALLOWFULLSCREEN='true' ALLOWSCRIPTACCESS='always'&&/embed&
450px*300px480px*400px650px*490px
支持嵌入HTML代码的网站使用
您的内容已经提交成功
您所提交的内容需要审核后才能发布，请您等待！
3秒自动关闭窗口《胡桃夹子》（聆听经典芭蕾舞剧音乐） - 歌单 - 网易云音乐
《胡桃夹子》（聆听经典芭蕾舞剧音乐）
准备到俄罗斯旅游必须要着正装看一场经典的芭蕾舞剧，第1-23首为《胡桃夹子The Nutcracker》完整全剧音乐，第24首以后为不同版本的精选。
一、简介： 柴可夫斯基的芭蕾舞剧《胡桃夹子》是世界上最优秀的芭...
准备到俄罗斯旅游必须要着正装看一场经典的芭蕾舞剧，第1-23首为《胡桃夹子The Nutcracker》完整全剧音乐，第24首以后为不同版本的精选。
一、简介： 柴可夫斯基的芭蕾舞剧《胡桃夹子》是世界上最优秀的芭蕾舞剧之一，有“圣诞芭蕾”的美誉。它之所以能吸引千千万万的观众，一方面是由于它有华丽壮观的场面、诙谐有趣的表演，但更重要的原因是柴科夫斯基的音乐赋予舞剧以强烈的感染力。 剧本是根据德国名作家霍夫曼的童话《胡桃夹子和鼠王》改编的，全剧共分两幕。
二、剧情简介：圣诞节，女孩玛丽得到一只胡桃夹子。夜晚，她梦见这胡桃夹子变成了一位王子，领着她的一群玩具同老鼠兵作战。后来又把她带到果酱山，受到糖果仙子的欢迎，享受了一次玩具、舞蹈和盛宴的快乐。
三、音乐简介：《胡桃夹子》首演于日在圣彼得堡举行，柴可夫斯基从全曲中一套组曲让《胡桃夹子》中最具特色的曲子广受欢迎，其中第二幕的插曲：以西班牙舞代表巧克力，以阿拉伯舞代表咖啡，中国舞代表茶。但全曲最美妙之处仍在《糖果仙子》中钢片琴独奏，依照剧本的描写迷人地暗示出水滴“从喷泉中溅出”，展现出一般乐曲少见的逼真写实。《花之圆舞曲》也是柴可夫斯基最知名的圆舞曲之一。 （备注：我最早听到胡桃夹子音乐片段是在看译制片《出水芙蓉》男人跳芭蕾的背景音乐，即花子圆舞曲和俄罗斯舞曲，印象深刻！）
《胡桃夹子》芭蕾舞剧是一个音乐童话，由一首序曲和两幕组成。
第一幕 — 第一幅画
1. 圣诞晚会。装饰和熠熠生辉的圣诞树
3. 小朋友的加洛舞曲，父母的登场
4. 舞蹈场景。 参议员杜塞梅尔的圣诞礼物
5. 场景和老爷爷的舞蹈
6. 场景。克拉拉和胡桃夹子
7. 场景，老鼠与玩具兵的战役
8. 场景。在圣诞树林里
9. 雪花之舞
第二幕 — 第三幅画
10. 场景。糖果王国的魔法宫殿
11. 场景。克拉拉与王子
a) 巧克力仙子— 西班牙舞曲
b) 咖啡仙子 — 阿拉伯舞曲
c) 茶仙子 — 中国舞曲
d) 特科帕克舞曲 — 俄罗斯舞曲
e) 芦笛之舞
f) 仙鹤妈妈与小丑
13. 花之圆舞曲
14. 双人舞
a) 引子 — 夜曲
b) 变奏I: 塔兰台拉舞
c) 变奏II: 糖梅仙子之舞
d) 结尾 — 欢庆之舞
播放：14677次
喜欢这个歌单的人
网易云音乐多端下载
同步歌单，随时畅听320k好音乐
网易公司版权所有(C)杭州乐读科技有限公司运营：
违法和不良信息举报电话：6
举报邮箱： 上传我的文档
 下载
 收藏
该文档贡献者很忙，什么也没留下。
 下载此文档
正在努力加载中...
风光柴蓄交流微电网的协调控制与黑启动策略研究
下载积分：2000
内容提示：风光柴蓄交流微电网的协调控制与黑启动策略研究
文档格式：PDF|
浏览次数：1|
上传日期： 15:50:51|
文档星级：
全文阅读已结束，如果下载本文需要使用
 2000 积分
下载此文档
该用户还上传了这些文档
风光柴蓄交流微电网的协调控制与黑启动策略研究
关注微信公众号Invitación: Simposio de Eficiencia Energética en la Industria, 21 de junio 2016, Hotel Camino Real Polanco, Ciudad de México
| LinkedIn
El 21 de junio, CAMEXA en colaboración con la consultora Renewables Academy AG (RENAC) invitará a un simposio donde expertos e interesados en eficiencia energética tendrán la oportunidad de conocer a dichas empresas alemanas y su portafolio de tecnología, productos y servicios. Asimismo, el evento contará con presentaciones de instituciones gubernamentales e locales que exhibirán los avances en materia de eficiencia energética tanto en México como en Alemania así como proyectos relevantes. Durante este día también se ofrecerá la posibilidad de Networking y reuniones individuales.
Para mayor información favor de seguir este link:&&Looking for more of the latest headlines on LinkedIn?(PDF) Revisi&n sistem&tica:&Cu&l es el agentet&pico m&s eficaz en la prevenci&n de infecciones en el paciente quemado?
See all >16 References
28.09Paediatric Hospital Dr. Juan P. GarrahanTopical agents are widely used in the c however the efficacy to prevent local infections and/or sepsis has not been clearly established in studies with a high level of evidence. This systematic review was conducted to assess the comparative efficacy among different topical agents. Material and Methods. The literature search was performed using the Medline database. Key MESH terms were: (burn* or scald*) AND (antibacterial or antibiotic*) AND (topic*) AND (therap* or prophylax*). Only randomized or quasi-randomized clinical trials, with a primary endpoint of local infection and/or sepsis were included. Studies were scored and classified regarding methodological key issues according to their level of evidence. Results. The initial search identified 457 studies of which 14 were eligible for final evaluation, and full text was available for 11 of them. Conclusions. The evidence found in our review does not support differences in efficacy of topical agents to reduce sepsis and/or local infections in burn patients.Discover the world's research15+ million members118+ million publications700k+ research projects
Arch Argent Pediatr 2012;110(4):298-303
298 Systematic Review: which topical agent is more efficacious in the prevention of infections in burn patients?SUMMARYTopical agents are widely used in the care of
however the efficacy to prevent local infections and/or sepsis has not been clearly established in studies with a high level of evi-dence. This systematic review was conducted to assess the comparative efficacy among different topical agents.Material and Methods. The literature search was performed using the Medline database. Key MESH terms were: (burn* or scald*) AND (antibacterial or antibiotic*) AND (topic*) AND (therap* or prophylax*). Only randomized or quasi-randomized clinical trials, with a primary endpoint of local infection and/or sepsis were included. Studies were scored and classified re-garding methodological key issues according to their level of evidence.Results. The initial search identified 457 studies of which 14 were eligible for final evaluation, and full text was available for 11 of them. Conclusions. The evidence found in our review does not support differences in efficacy of topi-cal agents to reduce sepsis and/or local infec-tions in burn patients. Key words: topical agents, burn, infections.http://dx.doi.org/10.5546/aap.2012.eng.298 INTRODUCTIONAccording to several authors, topi-cal agents, together with early surgical debridement have succeeded in de-creasing morbidity and mortality in patients with severe burns.1-3When burnt tissues are colonized, healing becomes slower because the presence of bacteria causes an exag-gerated inflammatory and deleterious response, which hinders wound heal-ing and favors infection.2-4The objectives of using topical anti-microbial agents are to avoid bacterial colonization and favor early wound healing by reducing the chance of in-fection. Nonetheless, these agents ef-ficacy has not been clearly established in controlled studies. Evidence regard-ing their usefulness to prevent burn related infections is scarce, but their a. Epidemiological Control and Infectology Department. Hospital “Prof. Dr. Juan P. Garrahan”.b. Fundación Centro de Estudios Infectológicos.c.
Instituto Argentino de Medicina Basada en la Evidencia.Buenos Aires,Argentina.E-mail address: María Teresa Rosanova:.arConflict of interest: None.Received: 2-2-2012Accepted: 4-11-2012use is quite extended. Therefore, the question arises regarding which topi-cal agent is more efficacious to pre-vent infections in the management of burns.To answer this question, a system-atic review of the biomedical litera- however, since a wide variety of topical anti-infective agents are used in the clinical practice, we thought it would be of interest to start by providing a brief description of them.1Silver-containing compounds 1% Silver Sulfadiazine: Its mecha-nism of action remains unclear. It is bactericidal against Gram-negative aerobic rods and may be efficacious against fungi. It does not penetrate the eschar ad-equately and its main adverse effect is the potential for leukopenia and, rare-ly, skin reactions. Some studies have demonstrated that it hinders the heal-ing process due to its toxicity on kera-tinocytes and fibroblasts.1 This agent may be combined with cerium ni-trate,4,6 but it should not be used, either alone or in combination, in patients al-lergic to sulfa medications. Since sulfas may cause jaundice of the basal gan-glia (kernicterus), they should not be used in infants younger than 2 months and in pregnant women.Other silver preparations are avail-able in various forms such as silver-impregnated dressings (Acticoat(R), among others), that can be replaced every 24 hours.Silver Nitrate: It is used as a 0.5% solution. It is bactericidal and does not penetrate the eschar. It must be applied every 2-3 hours and if used on large surface areas it may cause in-tense fluid and electrolyte imbalance, María Teresa Rosanovaa, M.D., Daniel Stamboulianb, M.D. and Roberto Ledec, M.D.Original article
Systematic Review: which topical agent is more efficacious in the prevention of infections in burn patients?
299and hyperpigmentation in the treated area.7In some large burn centers, the development of bacterial resistance secondary to silver formu-lations has been observed after their protracted use.8Antibiotic agents for local use0.5% Mafenide Acetate: This is a local bacterio-static antibiotic with a broad spectrum of action against Gram-negative and Gram-positive organ-isms, and certain strains of anaerobes, but with no effect on fungi. Its main adverse effect is the po-tential for metabolic acidosis. Like sulfadiazine, it may delay healing through the same mechanism. It diffuses into and through eschar better.Its disadvantage is that it causes pain on treat-ed areas. Due to its short half life it must be ap-plied every 12 hours.1,9Bacitracin: It is a petroleum-based polypeptide antibiotic for local use, effective against Gram- positive cocci and bacilli. Its mode of action is by inhibiting the bacterial cell wall synthesis.1,10Framycetin: It is a sulfate salt of neomycin B, bactericidal and active against Gram-positive coc-ci and Gram-negative rods.Other agents that have been used for the local treatment of burn wounds, with variable results, are polymixin and neomycin, either alone or com-bined with bacitracin, and mupirocin.Disinfecting agentsElectrolytic Cloroxidant in a hypertonic solution of sodium chloride (Amuchina(R)): Initially used as a disinfectant for fruits, vegetables and baby bottles. Currently it is used to prevent burn-associated
however, data available are scarce.11 It covers a broad spectrum of Gram-negative rods, Gram-positive cocci, fungi and viruses. Reports have been published about its use for the local treatment of burn wounds.11Clorhexidine and povidone-iodine are among this group.Natural topical agents Honey: This substance is non-toxic and non-irritant. In developing countries it has been used in superficial and intermediate partial-thickness
it reduces the bacterial inoculate and fa-vors granulation of burn wounds.12,13Papaya carica: In cases published, a favorable outcome has been described regarding its use to cover burn wounds.14Objective of this reviewTo evaluate the comparative efficacy of topical agents most frequently used to prevent infection in burn patients.MATERIAL AND METHODSInclusion criteriaa.
Randomized or quasi-randomized clinical tri-als (evidence levels 1b or 2a, as per the Cen-ter for Evidence-Based Medicine classification system, Oxford University, UK);b.
Studies including only burn patients without c.
Studies comparing the efficacy among topical d.
Development of infection and/or sepsis and/or time of wound re- and/or graft loe.
Summary available at least either in Spanish or in English.Exclusion criteriaa.
More than 20% of participants lost to follow-up b.
Descriptive studies of any type or opinion pa-pers, cohort or case-c.
Topical agents used in conditions unrelated to burns.Literature search A literature search was undertaken on No-vember 18th., 2011 using the computerized da-tabase (PUBMED), and the following key words: (burn* or scald*) AND (antibacterial or antibiotic*) AND (topic*) AND (therap* or prophylax*). A total of 457 citations were obtained, of which 400 were discarded because the topical agent was unrelated to burns, they were case reports, the topical agents were mentioned as part of the treat-ment but their role was not investigated, or they were basic experimental or in vitro trials. Another 4 papers were obtained from the reference list of the systematic reviews found.RESULTSFourteen papers were selected for final eval-uation and the text was available in 11 of them.Excluded studiesBrown et al.9 studied mafenide and its impact in reducing mortality. Mian et al. compared the incidence of sepsis and wound granulation in a series of 20 cases, in which Amuchina(R) was com-
Arch Argent Pediatr 2012;110(4):298-303
Original articlepared to silver sulfadiazine. None of them was a randomized or quasi-randomized study. One study was excluded because the summary was neither in English nor in S two were ex-cluded because they were experimental studies in rats and 5 because they were reviews.Included studiesStudies comparing silver-containing topical agents versus other agentsDe Gracia et al.,4 in an open randomized study, assigned the treatment according to a pre-estab-lished sequence (evidence level 2a) and com-pared 30 patients treated with silver sulfadiazine plus cerium nitrate to 30 patients treated only with silver sulfadiazine. Patients included were older than 4 months of age, had a burnt surface area &15% of their body surface area (BSA) and were admitted within 24 hours from the injury. The main pre-determined endpoints were wound healing and progression or not to sepsis. The study concluded that patients in the group treated with silver sulfadiazine plus cerium nitrate healed their wounds 8 days before patients treated only with silver sulfadiazine, and additionally, were hospitalized for a shorter time (23 vs. 30 days). However, no significant differences were found in burn related infection or sepsis rates.Ahuja et al.6 conducted a quasi-randomized, double blind study in treat-ments were assigned by drawing balls at random (evidence level 2a). They compared the outcome of 20 patients with burns affecting 15-40% of their BSA in whom they used 1% framycetin cream, to 20 patients treated with silver sulfadiazine. The main endpoint was bacterial count in the burn wound on days 4 and 7 in both groups. The 2 groups were similar in age and percent of burnt BSA (26% and 28.5% for framycetin and silver sulfadiazine, respectively). No differences were observed in colony counts of biopsies obtained on days 4 and 7.Liao et al7 conducted a multicenter random-ized study in 120 children and adults (80 with su-perficial or intermediate partial-thickness burns, groups A and AB, and 40 with deep burns, group B or “full-thickness” group). Patients were ran-domized (the summary does not describe the method employed) to receive silver nitrate or sil-ver sulfadiazine (evidence level 2a). The group treated with silver nitrate exhibited the same an-tibacterial effect than the group on silver sulfa-diazine. Since the paper is written in Chinese, we only had access to the summary.Muangman et al8 compared, apparently in a quasi-randomized manner, (evidence level 2b), the efficacy of a dressing containing silver sulfadi-azine versus 1% silver sulfadiazine in superficial and intermediate burns affecting less than 25% of the BSA. Patients were children and adults, and were divided into 2 groups of 25 patients each of similar age, percent of BSA affected and burn etiology. Of those 50 patients, 7 (28%) developed
no significant differences were detect-ed between groups. This paper was also written in Chinese, therefore we only worked with the summary. Studies comparing topical agents versus placebo Livingston et al.10 conducted a prospective ran-domized study (the patient allocation method was not clarified in the summary) in 52 child and adult patients subjected to tangential escharectomy and grafting upon admission (evidence level 2b). They compared the efficacy of two topical agents: 0.5% silver nitrate and neomycin (1 g/L) plus bacitra-cin (50,000 U/L) versus a Ringer’s lactate solution (used as placebo), in preventing graft loss due to infection. Seventeen patients (33%) suffered graft loss, which was attributed to infection in 16. In patients with burns involving less than 20% of the BSA, graft loss was not a relevant issue. The use of any of the two antimicrobial drugs re-sulted in less graft loss in patients with burns af-fecting 20-40% of their BSA: 1 out of 14 patients versus 4 out of 6 with Ringer’s lactate (p &0.05). In patients with & 40% burn of their BSA, 67% suffered graft loss regardless of the topical agent
moreover, 50% of the patients in the Ringer’s lactate group and the whole group that received bacitracin plus neomycin had infections caused by resistant microorganisms or fungi. The authors conclude that in patients with burns in-volving 20-40% of their BSA, topical antibiotics are efficacious in reducing infection related graft loss and that neomycin and bacitracin induce an-tibiotic resistance, whereas silver nitrate does not. Only the summary was available for this study.Studies that used antibiotics for systemic use
administered topically, compared with
silver-containing agentsSnelling et al.15 conducted a randomized study assigning treatments with a system of odds and even numbers at admission (evidence level 2a). A total of 71 child and adult pa the study compared 1% silver sulfadiazine ver-sus 0.1% gentamicin to prevent bacterial coloni-
Systematic Review: which topical agent is more efficacious in the prevention of infections in burn patients?
301zation and sepsis. Patients had to be at 24 hours post burn injury and have more than 10% of their BSA affected. Children and adults were divided into 2 groups: one with burns involving 11-40% of the BSA and another group with burns affecting & 41% of the BSA. Patients with odd numbers were treated with silver sulfadiazine (38 patients) and patients with even numbers received topical gen-tamicin (33 patients). Pseudomona aeruginosa colo-nized the burns of 37% of the 38 patients treated with sulfadiazine and 30% of the 33 patients treat- of the latter, 21% had their wound colonized with the same bacterium, but it was resistant to gentamicin. The emergence of resistance warranted discontinuation of gentami-cin prophylaxis.Studies with natural topical agents compared to
silver-containing agents Malik et al.12 evaluated the usefulness of un-processed honey for the topical treatment of burns affecting less than 40% of the BSA. The method of randomization employed is not de-scribed (evidence level 2a). Patients had to have two contralateral similar body segments (for ex-ample: both hands, right and left sides of the ab-domen) affected by second degree burns and one intervention was assigned to each segment. They included 150 patients of all ages. Interventions consisted in the topical application of honey or sil-ver sulfadiazine. Re-epithelization occurred faster in sites where honey was used (13.47 days ± 4.06 versus 15.62 ± 4.4 p &0.0001).Subrahmanyam,13 in a randomized study (the randomization meth evi-dence level 2a), evaluated 50 patients, aged 3 to 60 years, with burns affecting less than 40% of the BSA. Honey was used in 25 patients and silver sulfadiazine in the remaining 25. After 21 days of treatment, 100% of patients treated with honey had healed, compared to 84% these data were confirmed by lesion biopsy.DISCUSSIONNumerous topical agents have been proposed and utilized in the management of burn patients. However, in spite of their massive use, evidence regarding their usefulness in preventing the risk of infection is scarce.1-3It has been postulated that silver sulfadiazine reduces the bacterial inoculate, but data showing that it decreases the incidence of infection or sep-sis in burn patients are, in fact, scarce. The few studies cited in this review do not suggest that this agent exerts a better effect than others in re-ducing wound infection or the development of sepsis.4,6-8 The chance to slow the healing process and generate reversible leukopenia should be weighted at the time of prescription.Another problem to consider regarding non-absorbable antibiotics used locally is the selec-tion of resistant microorganisms, as shown in the study by Livingston et al.,10 that reported a high rate of resistance in patients treated with bacitra-cin plus neomycin. This cautions about the pos-sibility of generating resistance with the use of non-absorbable topical antibiotics.Systemic antibiotics have also been used local-ly, but Snelling15 demonstrated the emergence of gentamicin resistant strains during the course of topical treatment. Since this antibiotic is admin-istered systemically, this finding points out the need to avoid the use of systemic antibiotics as topical agents, since they could later be ineffective in patients requiring their systemic administration because of a severe condition. In developing countries, honey has been uti-lized for the treatment of burns.12-14 Malik12 and Subrahmanyam13 demonstrated faster re-epithe-lization in sites were honey was used compared to those where silver sulfadiazine was used, but burns treated were superfi it was not used in deep burns. Additionally, the small sample size in both studies would limit the validity of these conclusions.We underscore that this review questions the selection criteria used for one or another anti-in-fectious agent in the preventive topical treatment of burn wound infections, since the evidence pre-sented here is insufficient to define clear advan-tages of one agent over another. The conclusions of available studies are weakened by the following caveats: marked heterogeneity of criteria regarding the use of different kinds of topical agents, differ-ent ages of patients included (all included children and adults), variable surface and extent of burns, and the various definitions of predetermined end-points. Moreover, the lack of studies assessing the efficacy of those agents against placebo must be noted. In this review it was not possible to perform a metaanalysis given these limitations. The potential for certain agents to cause a de-lay in healing and to generate bacterial resistance is an important reason for caution.More prospective, randomized and controlled studies are required, with an adequate number of patients, in order to reliably assess the benefits of topical treatment in burn patients. n
Arch Argent Pediatr 2012;110(4):298-303
Original articleEvidence Level2a2a2a2b2bTable 1. Comparison of studies assessing the efficacy of topical treatment in burn patientsStudyGracia et al.20014Ahuja et al.20096Liao et al.20067Muangman P,20068Livingston et al.199010ObjectivesTo compare the effects of silver sulfadiazine with cerium nitrate plus silver sulfadiazine on wound healing and
development of sepsis.To compare bacterial count
at day 4 and 7 from the initial lesions in patients who
received framycetin vs.
silver sulfadiazine.To compare the time of healing and the antibacterial effect of silver sulfadiazine vs. silver nitrate in superficial and intermediate burns.To compare the efficacy of silver sulfadiazine vs. Acticoat(R) in superficial and intermediate burns affecting less than 25% of the BSA.To compare the effects of
silver nitrate vs. neomycin
plus bacitracin vs.
Ringer’s lactate
on graft loss.DesignOpen, randomizedRandomized, double blindRandomized, multicenterQuasi- randomized studyRandomizedPatients
(n)Age: older than 4 months. Thirty patients treated with silver sulfadiazine versus 30
treated with silver sulfadiazine plus cerium nitrate.Twenty child
and adult patients received local treatment with 1% framycetin vs. 20 patients who received silver sulfadiazine.One hundred
and twenty child and adult patients: 60 treated with sulfadiazine vs. 60 treated with silver nitrate.Fifty child
and patientsFifty two
and adultsConclusionsPatients on cerium nitrate were hospitalized 17.2 days vs. 25.1
p: 0.03, and had a faster wound healing (9.5 days
versus 14 days, p: 0.007).There was no significant difference in sepsis rate (1/30 in the cerium group vs. 4/30) or mortality rate (1/30 in the cerium group
vs. 4/30).There was no difference in bacterial count.Time of healing of superficial burns in the silver nitrate group was 9.5 ± 2.7 days vs.
10.8 ± 3.4 days in the
sulfadiazine group.Percent of healed tissue at
day 7 was 77.9 ± 20.5% with
silver nitrate vs. 67.3 ± 22.6%,
with sulfadiazine (p ≤0.01).In intermediate burns, time of healing was 21.5 ± 4.8 days with silver nitrate vs. 23.3 ± 6.4 days with sulfadiazine (p ≤0.01).Percent of healing at day 7
was 86.6 ± 15.9% with nitrate vs. 78.5 ± 17.7% with sulfadiazine
(p ≤0.01).There was no difference
between groups in the
incidence of infection
or hospital stay.Among patients with burns affecting 20-40% or more of their BSA, graft loss was: 1/14 with antibiotics vs. 4/6 with
Ringer’s lactate (p &0.05).Among patients with burns affecting &40% of the BSA, graft loss was 67%, regardless of the topical agent used.
Systematic Review: which topical agent is more efficacious in the prevention of infections in burn patients?
303REFERENCES1. Palmieri T, Greenhalgh D. Topical treatment of pediatric patients with burns: a practical guide. Am J Clin Dermatol ):529-34.2. Atiyeh B, Costagliola M, Hayeck S, Dibo S. Effect of silver on burn wound infection control and healing: review of the literature. Burns ):139-48.3. Mackway-Jones K. Best evidence topic report. Towards evidence-based emergency medicine: best BETs from the Manchester Royal Infrmary. Emerg Med J ):300.4. de Gracia CG. An open study comparing topical silver sulfadiazine and topical silver sulfadyazine cerium ni-trate in the treatment of moderate and severe burns. Burns -74.5. Garner JP, Heppell PS. Cerium nitrate in the management of burns. Burns ):539-47.6. Ahuja RB, Gupta A, Gur R. A prospective double blinded comparative analysis of framycetin and silver sulphadi-azine as topical agents for burns: a pilot study. Burns ):672-6.7. Liao ZJ, Huan JN, Lv GZ, Shou YM, Wang ZY. Multicenter clinical study of the effect of silver nitrate ointment on the partial thickness burn wounds. Zhongua Shao Shang Za Zhi ):359-61.8. Muangman P, Chuntrasakul C, Silthram S, Suvanchote S, et al. Comparison of efficacy of 1% silver sulfadiazine and Acticoat for treatment of partial thickness burn wounds. J Med Assoc Thai ):953-8.9. Brown TP, Cancio LC, McManus AT, Mason AD Jr. Sur-vival benefit conferred by topical antimicrobial prepara-tions in burn patients: a historical perspective. J Trauma ):863-6.10. Livingston DH, Cryer HG, Miller FB, Malangoni MA, et al. A randomized prospective study of topical antimicro-bial agents on skin grafts after thermal injury. Plast Recon-str Surg ):1059-64.11. Mian EU, Gianfaldoni R, Mian M. Topical treatment of burn wounds with chloroxidating solution and silver sulfadiazine: a comparative study. Drugs Exp Clin Res ):243-52.12. Malik KI, Malik MA, Aslam A. Honey compared with sil-ver sulphadiazine in the treatment of superficial partial thickness burns. Int Wound J ):413-7.13. Subrahmanyam M. A prospective randomised clinical and histological study of superficial burn wound healing with honey and silver sulphadiazine. Burns ):157-61.14. Starley IF, Mohammed P, Schneider G, Bickler S. The treatment of paediatric burns using topical papaya. Burns ):636-9.15. Snelling CF, Ronald AR, Waters WR, Yaworski DS, et al. Comparison of silver sulfadiazine and gentamicin for topi-cal prophylaxis against burn wound sepsis. Can Med Assoc J ):466-70.Snelling et
197815Malik et
al.201012Subrahman- yam M. 199813To compare silver sulfadiazine vs. gentamicin in preventing colonization and sepsis in burns affecting more than 10%
of the BSA, at 24 hours
from the initial injury.To compare the efficacy of
honey vs. silver sulfadiazine in superficial burns affecting
&40% of the BSA.To compare the time of
healing with silver sulfadiazine vs. honey.RandomizedRandomizedRandomization method
notspecified2a2a2aTissue colonization by Pseudomonas spp was found in 37% of the 38 patients treated with sulfadiazine and in 30% of the 33 patients tre 21% of Pseudomonas spp were resistant to gentamicin.Reepithelization time was shorter in the honey group than in the sulfadiazine group (13.47 ± 4.06
vs. 15.62 ± 4.4 p: 0.0001).A hundred percent of patients treated with honey healed by
day 21, vs. 84%
in the other group (p: 0.01).Seventy one
adult patientsOne hundred and fifty child and adult patientsFifty
children and adults
ArticleJan 2007BURNSArticleOct 2010Int Wound JArticleJun 2009ArticleOct 1978Can Med Assoc JArticleFeb 1991ArticleJan 1991PLAST RECONSTR SURGArticleApr 1998BURNSArticleDec 1999BURNSArticleMar 2001BURNSArticleFeb 2002AM J CLIN DERMATOLShow moreProject[...]We are working now in this project ProjectProjectArticleAugust 2012 · Topical agents are widely used in the c however the efficacy to prevent local infections and/or sepsis has not been clearly established in studies with a high level of evidence. This systematic review was conducted to assess the comparative efficacy among different topical agents. Material and Methods. The literature search was performed using the Medline database. Key... [Show full abstract]ArticleAugust 2012 · Topical agents are widely used in the c however the efficacy to prevent local infections and/or sepsis has not been clearly established in studies with a high level of evidence. This systematic review was conducted to assess the comparative efficacy among different topical agents. Material and Methods. The literature search was performed using the Medline database. Key... [Show full abstract]ArticleNovember 2010DataNovember 2013Es útil el uso de antibióticos sistémicos pro-filácticos para disminuir las infecciones de la heri-da por quemadura? Las infecciones de las heridas por quemadura son una de las principales complicaciones que se presentan tanto en los quemados graves en tera-pia intensiva como en aquellos con heridas leves. La utilidad de la profilaxis antibiótica para dis-minuir las infecciones relacionadas... [Show full abstract]ThesisAugust 2011