In-vitro Comparison of Antimicrobial Efficacy of Various Wound Dressing Materials.

Basterzi, Yavuz; Ersoz, Gulden; Sarac, Guliz; Sari, Alper; Demirkan, Ferit

UNLABELLED Many new antimicrobial dressings have been used for the treatment of or protection against wound infection since the early 1980s. There are many different wound dressings such as silver, povidone iodine, and chlorhexidine impregnated materials on the market today. Various manufacturers assert that their dressings are the most effective and therefore should be preferentially employed. However, it is difficult to find a study that clearly identifies the most effective antimicrobial wound dressing. METHODS Eight different commercially available wound dressing materials were compared in terms of their antimicrobial effectiveness on 18 different microorganisms via disk diffusion test (Kirby-Bauer Method) on Mueller-Hinton (MH) agar. Among the 16 bacterial and 2 yeast species grown on MH agar plates, Contreet was the most effective antimicrobial dressing tested (P <0.001). RESULTS A statistical difference was not found concerning efficacy against gram-positive and -negative bacteria among any of the materials except for Aquacel Ag and Inadine, the activity of which were found to be higher on gram-positive bacteria compared to gram-negative bacteria (P = 0.029, P = 0.030). In-vitro data suggest that Contreet is the most effective for topical treatment of contaminated wounds. CONCLUSION Further methods of assessment, including the use of infected animal models and clinical studies, will be necessary to better understand the antimicrobial efficacy of these dressings .