ReviewChemical burns: Pathophysiology and treatment
Introduction
A wide variety of chemicals may cause cutaneous and ocular burns and systemic effects either by absorption or inhalation, requiring in most of the cases medical and/or surgical treatment. Given the nature of the agents involved and the type of injuries (depth, lung injury, eye involvement, etc.) they produce a relevant loss of working time. Long-term sequelae are, unfortunately, not uncommon.
More than 25,000 chemicals are commonly used in the industry, agriculture, house cleaners and others, and many of them have been identified as having the potential to cause burns. This makes chemical burns an important risk in the household and in the industrial setting. Knowledge of the potential harm of these agents is very low in the domestic setting, whereas in the industry it is often underestimated. In the past years, an increase has been detected in using chemical agents in aggressions involving domestic violence, mainly to women, spraying them on the face and body, with the subsequent important and disfiguring burn sequelae, but the criminal use of chemicals to assault others is not uncommon [1], [2]. On the other hand, the international instability in some areas of the world with a lot of armed conflicts has increased the use and the threat of chemical weapons. There are reviews in the last years that have shown a predominance of injuries due to white phosphorous [3]. The variety of chemical agents is so vast that a short review cannot describe all the agents and their treatments, but we can provide general principles for the treatment of chemical injuries. The fact that they only represent near the 3% of all burns must not underscore these principles. They are present with an important morbidity (near 55% of them require surgery), commonly involve cosmetic body like face, thorax and hands, and in some series they carry approximately 30% of burns death [4]. Cutaneous chemical burns can present a variety of dilemmas to the clinician managing such cases. Assessment of burn depth is often difficult and the decision whether to excise the wound early is not always clear-cut. In this review, common agents are classified; the basic principles of management, and specific recommendations are examined. The complications arising from exposure to these chemicals and the supportive measures needed during treatment are also described (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, Fig. 5).
Section snippets
Pathophysiology
The body has very few specific protective and repair mechanisms for thermal, electrical, radiation and chemical burns. Denaturation of proteins is a common effect of all type of burns. However, chemical injuries have some important differences when compared to thermal burns. Chemical injuries are more likely produced by longer (minutes) exposure to chemicals, and this exposure may still be continuing in an emergency room in contrast with thermal injuries, which are typically produced by very
Mechanisms of action
There are six mechanisms of action for chemical agents in biological systems [5].
- (1)
Oxidation: The protein denaturation is caused by inserting an oxygen, sulphur, or halogen atom to viable body proteins (sodium hypochlorite, potassium permanganate, and chromic acid).
- (2)
Reduction: Reducing agents act by binding free electrons in tissue proteins. Heat may also be a product of a chemical reaction, thereby causing a mixed picture. The agents more likely to be encountered are hydrochloric acid, nitric
Type of chemicals
This classification is based on the chemical reactions that the chemical agent initiates. This method of classification is less accurate than describing how they coagulate the proteins. The ability to influence pH is one of the most important characteristics of an injurious chemical agent. Its concentration also plays an important role in the reactivity. Although the mechanisms of action for individual acids or alkali may differ, the resulting wounds are similar enough to include them in these
General principles of management
The ABC of Trauma, Primary and Secondary Assessment and all general principles of Trauma and Burn Care apply to chemical burns. However, there are also some relevant measures of first aid that must be remembered when considering chemical burns. Key points in the treatment of chemical burns are summarized in Table 1. Extracted from [7].
First aid measures for chemical burns involve several aspects such as:
- -
removal of the chemical agent,
- -
treatment of the systemic toxicity if any and side-effects of
Specific agents
There are several agents, most of them used in the industry, that have the potential to cause harm when in contact, inhaled, or ingested by humans. However, current practice in emergency departments and burn centres points out that few toxics and chemicals warrant further study in order to explore their potential to cause burns and their specific treatment. In most, if not in all of the agents, the common and general rules of treatment for chemical burns do apply. Physicians are always warned
Conclusions
Chemical burn injuries represent a small portion of total burn injuries. However, they are unique injuries which need a special attention and management because of their huge human and economic impact.
It is important to point out the importance of prevention, especially in working environments. Respecting the security rules and having showers and devices for eye irrigation are mandatory by consensus standards.
Patients must be treated by specialized practitioners and referred to a Burn Centre as
Conflict of interest statement
All authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest or commercial interest with the products, companies, or treatments cited in this article.
References (53)
- et al.
Acid and alkali: considerations in management
Burns
(1989) Effects of washing with a neutralizing agent on alkaline skin injuries in an experimental model
Burns
(1994)- et al.
Chemical burns of the eye with special reference to alkali burns
Burns
(1991) - et al.
An amphoteric rinse used in the emergency treatment of a serious ocular burn
Burns
(2002) - et al.
Wet cement remains a poorly recognised cause of full-thickness skin burns
Injury
(2004) - et al.
Effects of washing acid injuries to the skin with water: an experimental study using rats
Burns
(1995) - et al.
Pathological demonstration of rapid involvement into the subcutaneous tissue in a case of fatal hydrofluoric acid burns
Forensic Sci Int
(2007) Acute hydrofluoric acid exposure
Am J Emerg Med
(1988)- et al.
Hydrofluoric acid burns: a review
Burns
(1995) Hydrofluoric acid: review of toxicity
J Emerg Med
(1992)
Chemical burns: our 10 years experience
Burns
Digital hydrofluoric acid burns: treatment with intraarterial calcium infusion
Ann Emerg Med
Epidemiology of 377 patients with chemical burns in Guangdong province
Burns
Vesicant burns
Br J Plast Surg
Non-invasive quantification of skin injury resulting from exposure to sulphur mustard and Lewisite vapours
Burns
Efficacy of laser debridement with autologous split-thickness skin grafting in promoting improved healing of deep cutaneous sulfur mustard burns
Burns
A serious skin sulphur mustard burn from an artillery shell
J Emerg Med
Chemical warfare
J Am Acad Dermatol
Chemical burns
Chemical burns
J Trauma
Chemicals that “burn”
J Trauma
Corrosive chemicals: acids and alkali
Drug Ther
Chemical burns
Can J Surg
Chemical burns: retrospective review
The J Burn Care Rehab
Toxicology: the basic science of poisons
Cited by (154)
Prehospital and Emergency Management
2023, Surgical Clinics of North AmericaThe Burn Wound
2023, Surgical Clinics of North AmericaHistopathological findings in a pilot study of dairy calves disbudded with hot cauterization or caustic paste
2023, Journal of Comparative Pathology“Extensive necrosis following extravasation of alkali in the crease of the elbow after voluntary intravenous injection: A case report”
2023, Annales de Chirurgie Plastique EsthetiqueCitation Excerpt :A second round of debulking is planned in the coming months. Chemical burns represent about 2–3% of all burns [3,4]. In view of the wide variety of existing chemicals, the initial clinical presentation can be misleading and the real damage difficult to assess [1,4].