Aloe vera vs. Silver sulfadiazine for treating second-degree burn wounds: Evidence-based case report

Clara Menna, Nabilla Calista, Leorca Aurino, Adisti Dwijayanti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)


Objective: Current treatment for second-degree burn wounds, including silver sulfadiazine (SSD) application, may cause side effects such as delayed and incomplete wound healing, leaving a scar. Traditional plants empirically used for burn wounds, such as Aloe vera, seem to be a promising option with good safety profiles. Methods: We therefore compared Aloe vera to SSD for second-degree burn wounds based on a review of clinical trials obtained by an organized search through the Cochrane, PubMed, and DynaMed databases. Three randomized clinical trials studies were selected, two of which were critically appraised. The third study, with a different outcome assessment, was analyzed separately. Results: Two studies showed that Aloe vera was more effective in treating second-degree burn wounds than SSD 1% with an absolute risk reduction of 0.2, relative risk reduction of 0.83–1.0, and number needed to treat five patients. The Aloe vera group showed faster healing, earlier epithelialization, and earlier pain alleviation. The third study combined Aloe vera with other herbs, which showed better healing ability and restored skin hydration than those with SSD. Conclusion: Each of the three articles stated that Aloe vera was more effective than SSD for treating second-degree burn wounds. Nevertheless, each of the studies lacked methodology and comprehensive data reporting.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)146-148
Number of pages3
JournalInternational Journal of Applied Pharmaceutics
Issue numberSpecial Issue 6
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2019


  • Aloe vera
  • Second-degree burn wounds
  • Silver sulfadiazine


Dive into the research topics of 'Aloe vera vs. Silver sulfadiazine for treating second-degree burn wounds: Evidence-based case report'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this