Surreal illustration comparing Dressilk and Biobrane for burn treatment.

Scar Wars: Dressilk vs. Biobrane – Which Burn Treatment Reigns Supreme?

Beau Callahan in Health & Wellness July 2025 • 4 min read.

"A head-to-head comparison of two leading treatments for superficial burns reveals surprising insights into scar quality, healing, and patient satisfaction."

Scars, especially those on visible areas like the hands and face, can significantly impact a person's self-esteem and social interactions. The aesthetic outcome of burn treatments is, therefore, a critical consideration for both patients and healthcare providers. Visible scarring can lead to distress and perceived stigmatization, highlighting the importance of effective burn care that minimizes long-term marks.

Functionality, particularly in the hands, is another crucial factor in burn treatment. Scar contractures can limit hand movement, affecting daily activities and overall quality of life. Balancing aesthetic outcomes with functional preservation requires a comprehensive approach to burn management.

A variety of wound dressings are available for treating superficial and partial-thickness burns, each promising rapid healing and reduced scarring. However, objective evaluations of scarring after burn treatment remain limited. This article explores a recent study comparing two popular treatments, Dressilk and Biobrane, focusing on their long-term effects on scar quality.

Dressilk vs. Biobrane: What Does the Science Say About Scarring?

Surreal illustration comparing Dressilk and Biobrane for burn treatment.

A recent intra-individual comparison study published in 'Burns' journal investigated the aesthetic outcomes of treating superficial burns on the hands and face with Dressilk and Biobrane. The study involved 30 patients who received both treatments simultaneously on different areas of their burns. Researchers then conducted objective scar evaluations, analyzing factors such as melanin and erythema levels, skin elasticity, trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL), and scar perfusion at three, six, and twelve months post-injury. Subjective scar assessments were also performed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS).

Here's a breakdown of the key components in each treatment:

Biobrane: A bio-composite dressing made from an ultra-thin, semi-permeable silicone membrane bonded to a nylon fabric with porcine collagen. It acts as a temporary epidermis, promoting healing in superficial to mid-dermal burns.
Dressilk: A relatively new biomaterial made from fibroin silk produced by silkworms. Silk has shown promise in wound healing due to its anti-inflammatory properties and ability to promote collagen regeneration.

The study revealed that both Dressilk and Biobrane led to aesthetically pleasing outcomes after treating superficial burns on the hands and faces. While there were some differences in trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL) observed at the six-month mark, these differences were not sustained at the twelve-month follow-up. Subjective scar evaluations showed no significant differences between the two dressings, with patients reporting high satisfaction with the scar quality.

Dressilk: A Promising Alternative for Burn Care?

The study's conclusion suggests that Dressilk is a viable alternative to Biobrane for treating superficial burns, especially in aesthetically and functionally important areas. Given its lower material costs, Dressilk presents a cost-effective option for burn care. While more research is needed to explore the long-term benefits and potential applications of silk-based dressings, the findings offer valuable insights for healthcare providers and burn survivors seeking effective and affordable treatment options.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1016/j.burns.2017.07.024, Alternate LINK

Title: Evaluation Of Scar Quality After Treatment Of Superficial Burns Of The Hands And Face With Dressilk Or Biobrane—An Intra-Individual Comparison

Subject: Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Journal: Burns

Publisher: Elsevier BV

Authors: Jennifer Lynn Schiefer, Rebekka Rath, Elena Ahrens, Daniel Grigutsch, Ingo Gräff, Jan-Philipp Stromps, Paul Christian Fuchs, Alexandra Schulz

Published: 2018-03-01

Everything You Need To Know

What are the key differences between Dressilk and Biobrane in treating superficial burns?

The primary difference lies in their composition. Biobrane is a bio-composite dressing featuring a silicone membrane bonded to a nylon fabric with porcine collagen, functioning as a temporary epidermis. Dressilk, on the other hand, is a biomaterial derived from fibroin silk produced by silkworms. Both are used for superficial burns on hands and faces, but the material composition and properties, such as Dressilk's anti-inflammatory characteristics, differentiate them. The study found that both led to aesthetically pleasing outcomes.

How do Dressilk and Biobrane impact long-term scar quality and patient satisfaction?

A recent study compared the long-term effects of Dressilk and Biobrane on scar quality. The study analyzed factors like melanin and erythema levels, skin elasticity, trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL), and scar perfusion. Subjective assessments were performed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). The study found no significant differences in scar quality between the two treatments, and patients reported high satisfaction with the results. This indicates that both Dressilk and Biobrane can lead to positive aesthetic outcomes.

What specific factors were evaluated to assess the effectiveness of Dressilk and Biobrane?

The study evaluating Dressilk and Biobrane assessed several key factors related to scarring. Objective evaluations included measurements of melanin and erythema levels to assess pigmentation, skin elasticity, trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL) to gauge skin barrier function, and scar perfusion to evaluate blood flow. Subjective assessments involved the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), which captured patient and observer perspectives on scar appearance and overall satisfaction. These comprehensive evaluations provided a detailed comparison of the two treatments.

Considering the functionality of hands, what role do Dressilk and Biobrane play in burn treatment?

Functionality, especially in the hands, is a critical aspect of burn treatment. Scar contractures can limit hand movement, affecting daily activities and quality of life. While both Dressilk and Biobrane aim to minimize scarring, their impact on hand functionality is a key consideration. The study suggests that Dressilk, being a viable alternative to Biobrane, helps in achieving favorable aesthetic outcomes while preserving hand functionality. This comprehensive approach balances aesthetic results with the preservation of hand movement, which is crucial for burn survivors.

How does Dressilk compare to Biobrane regarding cost and future applications in burn care?

Dressilk presents a cost-effective option for burn care due to its lower material costs compared to Biobrane. The study suggests that Dressilk is a viable alternative for treating superficial burns, especially in aesthetically and functionally important areas like the hands and face. While both treatments are effective, the cost advantage of Dressilk makes it a promising option. Future research might explore the long-term benefits and broader applications of silk-based dressings, further solidifying its potential in burn care and potentially expanding its use in other wound-healing scenarios.