Comparison of Manuka Honey (Manuka Nd, G) and Etacridine Lactate (Rivanol) Applications in the Treatment of Infected Wounds in Cats

Background: Ethacridine lactate (Rivanol) has been used as an antibacterial drug in the treatment of infected wounds for many years. Although Manuka honey has been used in the treatment of burns, ulcers and infected wounds in human medicine for many years, its use in veterinary medicine is new.  Manuka honey has been found to provide rapid cicatrization and lower chronic pain levels, to prevent bad odor, and has antibacterial properties. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of Etacridine lactate and Manuka honey in the treatment of infected wounds in cats.Materials, Methods & Results:  In this study, 32 cats, with infected wounds in different areas on their body, were used. Cats were divided into two groups. The Rivanol group (n = 16) consisted of 6 female and 10 male cats aged 4 ± 3 years from different breeds and in several weights. Manuka group (n = 16) consisted of 7 male and 9 female cats of different breeds and weight and aged 4 ± 2 years. Rivanol was applied to the first group and Manuka honey (Manuka Nd, G) was applied to the second group. First measurements were recorded after the surgical debridement of the wound area. Four measurements were made every 3 days. The size (length - width) of the wounds was measured and recorded. Parenteral Marbofloxacin was administered orally in all cases. In order to prevent the contact of the cases with the dressing, the collar was worn. In the Rivanol group, when the first measurement values (length: 4.29 ± 2.78 cm, width: 2.13 ± 0.58 cm) and the 4th measurement values (length: 2.21 ± 1.37 cm, width: 1.06 ± 0.41 cm) were compared, there was a decrease in the wound size. In the Manuka group, when the first measurement values (length 2.84 ± 1.51 cm, width: 2.01 ± 1.03cm) and the 4th measurement values (length: 1.42 ± 1.10 cm, width: 0.90 ± 0.72cm) were compared, the wound sizes were diminished as in the Rivanol group. In all measurement days, the differences between of Rivanol and Manuka groups concerning the width, length and wound sizes were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Wound size, length and width showed a linear decrease over the measurement days. These decreases were similar in Rivanol and Manuka group. There was no statistically significant difference between Rivanol (12.44 ± 3.74 days) and Manuka (12.44 ± 4.68 days) groups over the cicatrization period (P > 0.05).Discussion: Rivanol and Manuka honey were effective in wound healing. Although there were no differences between the two groups, the wound sizes decreased in each measurement of the wounds. A moist environment was formed on the wound, debrideman accelerated and granulation tissue formation was encouraged with the application of both topical agents. Therefore, it was considered that wound healing in our cases was successful. It has been found that honey is frequently applied in wound treatment and in many areas in human medicine. However, in the field of veterinary medicine, there were few investigations. In the treatment of infected wounds of cats, it was determined that the application of Rivanol and Manuka honey yielded similar results in terms of time and there was no statistically significant difference. Manuka honey was found to be an alternative to Rivanol in the treatment of infected cat wounds. Manuka honey preparations (pad or pomade) were preferred because of the ease of use. In order to determine the efficacy of manuka honey in wound healing, it was thought that many further clinical or experimental studies should be carried out using microbiological, biochemical and histopathological parameters.