A prospective double-blinded comparative analysis of framycetin and silver sulphadiazine as topical agents for burns: A pilot study

Burn wound sepsis remains the leading cause of mortality if conservative methods of wound management are employed. Topical agents are still the mainstay of such wound management in the developing world. Non availability of agents like Mafenide or silver ion dressings in the developing world due to corporate strategies or cost concerns necessitates a search for alternatives to silver sulphadiazine, which is the gold standard. We report the use of framycetin 1% cream (Soframycin®) in 20 patients of major burns (ranging from 15% to 40% TBSA), and in a double blinded study quantitatively comparing the bacterial load on day 4 and day 7 with a group of similar patients in whom silver sulphadiazine was used. The age group of the 40 patients was 10–50 years and they were without any co-morbid condition. All bacterial isolates from the 40 patients were also tested for framycetin sensitivity. Serial kidney function tests were done on all patients, and patients in the framycetin group underwent an audiometric testing at a mean time of 28 days. All results were statistically analyzed. It was noted that there was no statistically significant difference in the colony counts on days 4 and 7 between the two groups. As a corollary, it was also evident that there was no statistically significant difference in the rise in colony counts from day 4 to day 7 in the two groups. Sixty-four percent of all bacterial isolates were sensitive to framycetin, although, this could not be compared with sensitivity to silver sulphadiazine. It was not possible to do assays for framycetin levels in blood but no patient developed nephrotoxicity or ototoxicity with its use. According to our pilot study results framycetin appears to be an alternative to silver suphadiazine as a topical agent for major burns. Framycetin application is also painless and it leads to no discoloration of the wound.