Summary: In the world practice of treating burns, acellular matrices have been used for quite a long time. However, the budget for treating one burn patient in Kazakhstan does not exceed $1000. This amount does not cover the costs for procurement of foreign-made xenograft dressings. Because the cattle breeding sector is very well-developed in the country, a domestic xenograft is produced by decellularization and sterilization of the cattle peritoneum, which costs only $10. This case report outlines how we used this matrix in a patient with partial thickness burns. A 45-year-old woman was admitted to the burn department with second stage burns on her back and right shoulder. The burn area comprised 10%, according to the Lund Browder chart. Once formal consent was obtained from the patient, an occlusive dressing was applied from the decellularized cattle peritoneum. Good adhesion of the dressing to the wound bed was noted. The patient was discharged from the hospital on the tenth day. It took 23 days to reach complete epithelialization. No adverse effects were noted. We believe that further studies conducted by our research team will allow this innovative, low-cost, easy-to-apply biologic dressing to be widely used in the therapeutic treatment of burns.

Background and Objectives: Homogeneous and xenogenic bioengineering structures are actively used as wound coatings in treatment of burns and have already shown their effectiveness. Nevertheless, the disadvantage of such dressings is their high cost. This issue is particularly challenging for developing countries in which the incidence of burns is the highest one. With such needs taken into account, the research team developed and clinically tested a new wound coating based on decellularized bovine peritoneum (DBP). Materials and Methods: A multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted to evaluate DBP. The following variables were considered in the research study: the number of inpatient days, the number of dressing changes, the level of pain experienced during dressing changes, and the condition of wounds at the time of the follow-up examination. Results: The research involved 68 participants. It was found that the patients who were treated with a DBP experienced less pain with less changes of dressings. However, the number of inpatient days and wound healing failed to demonstrate statistically significant difference compared to the control group. Conclusions: In the given research, DBP showed efficacy in improving patients’ quality of life by reducing pain and the number of dressings’ changes. However, when comparing this research study with the studies of other animal-derived wound coverings, there were a number of differences and limitations in the parameters. Thus, the results requires further study for a greater comparability of data. Given the above, we expect that DBP will become an inexpensive and effective treatment for burns in developing countries.