Hq. Yin et al., Comparative evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of ACTICOAT* Antimicrobial Barrier Dressing, J BURN CARE, 20(3), 1999, pp. 195-200
This study evaluated the antimicrobial activity of ACTICOAT Antimicrobial B
arrier Dressing (Westaim Biomedical Corp, Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta, Canad
a), a silver-coated wound dressing, and compared it with silver nitrate, si
lver sulfadiazine, and mafenide acetate. The minimum inhibitory concentrati
ons (MIC), minimum bactericidal concentrations (MBC), zone of inhibition, a
nd killing curves were determined with 5 clinically relevant bacteria. The
data indicate that ACTICOAT silver had the lowest MIC and MBC and generated
similar zones of inhibition to silver nitrate and silver sulfadiazine. Via
ble bacteria were undetectable 30 minutes after inoculation with the dressi
ng, whereas it took 2 to 4 hours for silver nitrate and silver sulfadazine
to achieve the same result. Mafenide acetate generated the biggest zones of
inhibition, but it had the highest MICs and MBCs, and a significant number
of bacteria still survived after 6 hours of treatment. The results suggest
that ACTICOAT Antimicrobial Barrier Dressing has better antimicrobial perf
ormance than either of the existing silver-based products. ACTICOAT dressin
g killed the bacteria that were tested much faster, which is a very importa
nt characteristic for a wound dressing acting as a barrier to invasive infe
ction to have. The study also suggests that a single susceptibility test su
ch as a MIC or zone of inhibition test does not provide a comprehensive pro
file of antimicrobial activity of a topical antimicrobial agent or dressing
. A combination of tests is desirable.