Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-nf276 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-24T06:05:08.962Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of silver sulfadiazine and zinc oxide creams on dose distribution during radiotherapy.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 January 2015

D. Fackrell ,
D. Kirby ,
P. Sanghera  and
A. Hartley
D. Fackrell*
Affiliation:
Hall-Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK
D. Kirby
Affiliation:
Hall-Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK
P. Sanghera
Affiliation:
Hall-Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK
A. Hartley
Affiliation:
Hall-Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK
*
Correspondence to: Dr David Fackrell, The Cancer Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK. Tel: 0 797 025 2673. E-mail: davidfackrell@nhs.net
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction

The use of metallic containing creams to prevent and treat radiodermatitis is controversial and lacking evidence base. We compare the dose effect of two metallic-based skin creams, which could be used for treating radiodermatitis, to a control.

Methodology

Universal containers of silver sulfadiazine cream, zinc oxide cream and aqueous cream were examined using a computed tomography scanner to assess their electron densities relative to water. Second, each cream was exposed to 100 kV and 6 MV photons. The relative doses were measured using an X-ray chamber.

Results

The relative electron density measured was similar for the silver sulfadiazine and aqueous creams. Zinc oxide was 40% higher. The relative dose measurements showed that silver sulfadiazine behaved in a similar way to aqueous cream; however, zinc oxide cream exhibited a dose difference of 11·0% in kV photons and −4·1% in MV photons.

Conclusion

Application of silver sulfadiazine appears unlikely to bring about significant changes in the dose distribution when compared with aqueous during MV or kV radiotherapy. While zinc oxide cream brought about more significant dose changes.

Keywords

radiation dermatitisradiotherapysilver sulfadiazineskin carezinc oxide

Information

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , June 2015 , pp. 111 - 116
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Salvo, N, Barnes, E, Van Draanen, Jet al. Prophylaxis and management of acute radiation-induced skin reactions: a systemic review of the literature. Curr Oncol 2010; 17 (4): 94–112.Google Scholar
2.Harris, R, Probst, H, Beardmore, Cet al. Radiotherapy skin care: a survey of practice in the UK. Radiography 2012; 18 (1): 21–27.Google Scholar
3.Harper, J, Franklin, L, Jenrette, J, Aguero, E. Skin toxicity during breast irradiation: pathophysiology and management. South Med J 2004; 97 (10): 989–993.Google Scholar
4.Hemati, S, Asnaashari, O, Sarvizadeh, Met al. Topical silver sulfadiazine for the prevention of acute dermatitis during irradiation for breast cancer. Support Care Cancer 2012; 20 (8): 1613–1618.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Olsen, D L, Raub, W, Bradley, C. The effect of aloe vera gel/mild soap versus mild soap alone in preventing skin reactions in patients undergoing radiation therapy. Oncol Nurs Forum 2001; 3: 543–547.Google Scholar
6.Thornton Sann, C, Tutrone, W D, Weinberg, J Met al. Topical antibacterial agents for wound care: a primer. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29: 620–626.Google Scholar
7.McQuestion, M. Evidence-based skin care management in radiation therapy: clinical update. Semin Oncol Nurs 2011; 27 (2): e1–e17.Google Scholar
8.Burch, S E, Parker, S A, Vann, A-M, Arazie, J C. Measurement of 6-MV X-ray surface dose when topical agents are applied prior to external beam irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997; 38 (2): 447–451.Google Scholar
9.Bieck, T, Phillips, S. Appraising the evidence for avoiding lotions or topical agents prior to radiation therapy. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2010; 14 (1): 103–105.Google Scholar
10.Morley, L, Cashell, A, Sperduti, A, McQuestion, M, Chow, J C L. Evaluating the relevance of dosimetric considerations to patient instructions regarding skin care during radiation therapy. J Radiother Prac 2013; 44: 1–8 (First View).Google Scholar
11.Wasiak, J, Cleland, H, Campbell, F. Dressings for superficial and partial thickness burns. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; 4: CD002106.Google Scholar
12.http://www.uptodate.com/contents/radiation-dermatitis. Accessed 7 January 2015.Google Scholar
13.Wong, R K, Bensadoun, R-J, Boers-Doets, C Bet al. Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of acute and late radiation reactions from the MASCC Skin Toxicity Study Group. Support Care Cancer 2013; 21 (10): 2933–2948.Google Scholar
14.Sudocrem® Technical Information. Sudocrem tech info as stated. http://www.sudocrem.co.uk/antiseptic-healing-cream/what-is-sudocrem. Accessed 7 January 2015.Google Scholar
15.Ulff, E, Maroti, M, Serup, J, Falkmer, U. A potent steroid cream is superior to emollients in reducing acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant radiotherapy. A randomised study of betamethasone versus two moisturizing creams. Radiother Oncol 2013; 108 (2): 287–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed