Comparative Efficacy of Hypochlorous Acid and Mafenide Acetate in Reducing Infection Rates in Postoperative Burn Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Clicks: 26
ID: 314787
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #9 of 77 articles by views in journal of burn care & research : official publication of the american burn association

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Infection is a leading cause of mortality in patients with third-degree burns, contributing to over 75% of burn-related deaths. Despite the widespread use of hypochlorous acid and mafenide acetate as wet dressings in burn care, direct comparisons of their effectiveness are limited. Thus, this study evaluates the relative efficacy of hypochlorous acid and mafenide acetate in managing infections and improving survival outcomes in postoperative burn patients. This retrospective study included adults with second and third-degree burns who underwent excision and grafting between January 2012 – February 2024 at an American Burn Association-verified burn center. Infection, mortality, length of stay, number of operations, and complications were compared across initial antiseptic treatment using chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests. The study cohort comprised 274 patients, the majority of whom sustained flame burns (63.1%), with an average total body surface area burned of 11.2±13.7%. Within the cohort, 88.7% received mafenide acetate and 11.3% hypochlorous acid. Thirteen patients (41.9%) who received hypochlorous acid developed an infection requiring antibiotics, which on average, took 6.85±5.71 days to develop. This was not statistically different from those in the mafenide acetate group, of which 90 patients (37.0%) developed an infection (p=0.5840) which took 6.50±8.47 days to develop (p=0.4436). Mortality was also not significantly different between groups. No significant differences were found between hypochlorous acid and mafenide acetate in infection, mortality, or morbidity outcomes. Both treatments are viable antiseptic options for postoperative burn care, and clinicians can be flexible in choosing either treatment based on patient needs, cost, or availability without compromising care quality.
Reference Key
openalex_W7162197253 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Mia J Carrarini, Christopher Fedor, Omar Zein, Hilary Y Liu, José Antonio Arellano, Garth Elias, A Corcos, Jenny Ziembicki, M H Yassin, Francesco M. Egro
Journal journal of burn care & research : official publication of the american burn association
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jbcr/irag080
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irag080
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.