The Effects of Topically Applied Nitrofurazone and Rifamycin on Wound Healing

Mutlu Saydam, MD; Sarper Yilmaz, MD; Ergin Seven, MD; Ali Riza Erçöçen, MD; Serkan Saydam, PhD; Hafize Sezer, PhD

Disclosures

Wounds. 2006;18(3):71-76. 

In This Article

Results

Results for each group were as follows:

  • Nitrofurazone group. The earliest wound healing was observed on Day 18, the latest was observed on Day 28, and the average wound closure time was 22.1 days.

  • Rifamycin group. The earliest wound healing was observed on Day 15, the latest was observed on Day 24, and the average wound closure time was 19.6 days.

  • Nitrofurazone-rifamycin combination group. The earliest wound healing was observed on Day 14, the latest was observed on Day 22, and the average wound closure time was 17.5 days.

  • Neomycin-bacitracin combination group. The earliest wound healing was observed on Day 15, the latest was observed on Day 22, and the average wound closure time was 18.1 days.

  • No treatment group. The earliest wound healing was observed on Day 17, the latest was observed on Day 24, and the average wound closure time was 19.4 days.

The mean healing times and the standard deviations are shown in Table 1.

Statistical Relationships Among the Groups

Upper and lower wounds were evaluated separately. In both upper and lower wound groups, the groups were compared with the Kruskal-Wallis test. The differences among the groups were significant (P = 0.01 for the upper wound group; P = 0.007 for lower wound group).

Upper Wounds. Five groups were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test:

  • Between the nitrofurazone group and the rifamycin group (P = 0.109)

  • Between the nitrofurazone group and the nitrofurazone-rifamycin combination group (P = 0.009)

  • Between the nitrofurazone group and the neomycin-bacitracin combination group (P = 0.003)

  • Between the nitrofurazone group and the no treatment group (P = 0.04).

The other group comparisons were found to be insignificant (P > 0.05).

Lower Wounds. Five groups were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test:

  • Between the nitrofurazone group and the rifamycin group (P = 0.079)

  • Between the nitrofurazone group and the nitrofurazone-rifamycin combination group (P = 0.009)

  • Between the nitrofurazone group and neomycin-bacitracin combination group (P = 0.005)

  • Between the nitrofurazone group and the no treatment group (P = 0.016).

The other group comparisons were found to be insignificant (P > 0.05).

Interestingly, no statistical significance appeared between the nitrofurazone group and the rifamycin group in both upper and lower wound groups. Although the nitrofurazone group was significantly different from the other 3 groups, the nitrofurazone and rifamycin groups were not significantly different from each other, and the rifamycin group was not significantly different from the other 3 groups. This seems to be a bias. However, the authors attribute this to the low number of wounds. The other statistical values seemed to be rational, and the statistical results of the upper and lower wounds were comparable. Figures 3 and 4 show the error bars of both groups.

Figure 3.

Error bar for upper wounds

Figure 4.

Error bar for lower wounds

The wounds in the nitrofurazone-treated group healed slower than the other groups and this result was statistically significant. No statistically significant results were encountered among the other groups. While the wounds treated with nitrofurazone alone healed slowly, wounds treated with nitrofurazone-rifamycin combination healed as fast as the other groups.

Comments

3090D553-9492-4563-8681-AD288FA52ACE
Comments on Medscape are moderated and should be professional in tone and on topic. You must declare any conflicts of interest related to your comments and responses. Please see our Commenting Guide for further information. We reserve the right to remove posts at our sole discretion.

processing....