摘要：--

摘要：Background: Burns are considered a serious health affection that leads to several consequences affecting a person both physically and emotionally. Herbal and traditional medicine have become popular remedies among patients worldwide. Aim: This study explores common practices followed in burns as first aid management. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia using a designed questionnaire distributed electronically through different social media. The questionnaire consisted of socio-demographic details, history of burns, causative material, and practices followed in response to burns. Results: 461 individuals have participated in this study. The commonest reason for burns was hot water or steam. The majority of the respondents (63%) had a satisfactory response to self-aid alone at home. The most common first aid options for managing burns at home were cold water alone 195 (42%), any sort of cream alone 177 (38%), or both 317 (69%). Overall, the result shows no statistically significant difference between the outcome of burn injury and the most commonly used burn aids. Conclusions: Most people use creams and water as the first-aid management of burns, while a good number of people use traditional medicine. Overall, people who receive hospital treatment after getting first aid at home give a better outcome.

摘要：Keratoacanthoma centrifugum marginatum (KCM) of the skin is a rare variant of cutaneous keratoacantoma. KCM was first reported in 1962 andpresents with progressive peripheral expansion , no spontaneous clearing and a bank-shaped outer wall with concurrent central healing. Treatment options include topical and systemic therapies.Surgical intervention is the preferred therapy for solitary KCM. We report on surgery and photodynamic therapy delivered sequentially to treat a giant facial Keratoacanthoma centrifugum marginatum patient. It was safe and effective .

摘要：This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of moist exposed burn ointment (MEBO) for diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Two researchers independently assessed the quality and validity of included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in 7 electronic databases. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane handbook guidelines. Twenty seven trials which include 1,979 patients were involved for analysis. Comparison of the same intervention strategies revealed significant differences in total effectiveness rates between BEBO and conventional therapy group (Risk Ratio [RR], 6.36, [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.20, 12.64], P < 0.00001); MEBO combined with standard therapy (Risk Ratio [RR], 1.19, [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.08, 1.31], P = 0.0007); and healing time of DFU (Mean Difference [MD], 14.15, [95% confidence interval (CI), -18.14, -10.17], P < 0.00001). MEBO may be effective for treating DFU. However, a firm conclusion could not be reached because of the poor quality of the included trials. Further trials with higher quality are justified.   Key words: Exposed wound ointment (MEBO), diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), recombinant bovine, basic fibroblast growth factor (rb-bFGF), vacuum sealing drainage (VSD).