Comparison between artificial dermis with split-thickness skin graft and full-thickness skin graft for reconstruction of joint-involved burn wounds: A retrospective review from a tertiary burn centre.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY
Jui-Po Yeh, Ko-Chien Lin
{"title":"Comparison between artificial dermis with split-thickness skin graft and full-thickness skin graft for reconstruction of joint-involved burn wounds: A retrospective review from a tertiary burn centre.","authors":"Jui-Po Yeh, Ko-Chien Lin","doi":"10.1111/iwj.70116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We aimed to compare the scar quality and recovery rate of joint activity for patients with joint-involved burn injuries receiving either artificial dermis (AD) with split-thickness skin graft (STSG) or full-thickness skin graft (FTSG) for reconstruction. The primary outcomes were %skin graft (SG) take. Secondary outcomes included complications such as the infection rate and donor site morbidity, 12-month scar quality evaluated using the Vancouver scar scale (VSS), recovery rate of joint activity and incidence of scar contracture requiring further revision. Twenty-eight patients between 1 August 2021, and 1 August 2023, were enrolled. Twelve patients received AD-STSG while the other 16 patients underwent FTSG for reconstruction. The median %SG take was 95.0% (interquartile range [IQR] 6.3%) and 96.0% (IQR 10.0%) for the AD-STSG and FTSG groups (p = 0.71). The FTSG group had significantly better 12-month scar quality (median VSS 4.0 [IQR 1.3] vs. 6.0 [IQR1.5], p < 0.01) and recovery rate of joint activity (median 82.5% [IQT 15.0%] vs. 70.0% [IQR 7.5%], p < 0.01) compared with AD-STSG group. However, two patients in the FTSG group (12.5%) suffered partial wound dehiscence of the donor site, whereas no patients experienced donor site morbidity in the AD-STSG group (p = 0.49). The incidence of scar contracture requiring further revision was 25.0% (3/12) in the AD-STSG group and 12.5% (2/16) in the FTSG group (p = 0.62). In conclusion, AD-STSG could be an alternative treatment over FTSG for larger joint-involved burn wounds (>200 cm<sup>2</sup>) owing to lesser donor site morbidity with admissible cosmetic outcomes and functional recovery.</p>","PeriodicalId":14451,"journal":{"name":"International Wound Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"e70116"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11725369/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Wound Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.70116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We aimed to compare the scar quality and recovery rate of joint activity for patients with joint-involved burn injuries receiving either artificial dermis (AD) with split-thickness skin graft (STSG) or full-thickness skin graft (FTSG) for reconstruction. The primary outcomes were %skin graft (SG) take. Secondary outcomes included complications such as the infection rate and donor site morbidity, 12-month scar quality evaluated using the Vancouver scar scale (VSS), recovery rate of joint activity and incidence of scar contracture requiring further revision. Twenty-eight patients between 1 August 2021, and 1 August 2023, were enrolled. Twelve patients received AD-STSG while the other 16 patients underwent FTSG for reconstruction. The median %SG take was 95.0% (interquartile range [IQR] 6.3%) and 96.0% (IQR 10.0%) for the AD-STSG and FTSG groups (p = 0.71). The FTSG group had significantly better 12-month scar quality (median VSS 4.0 [IQR 1.3] vs. 6.0 [IQR1.5], p < 0.01) and recovery rate of joint activity (median 82.5% [IQT 15.0%] vs. 70.0% [IQR 7.5%], p < 0.01) compared with AD-STSG group. However, two patients in the FTSG group (12.5%) suffered partial wound dehiscence of the donor site, whereas no patients experienced donor site morbidity in the AD-STSG group (p = 0.49). The incidence of scar contracture requiring further revision was 25.0% (3/12) in the AD-STSG group and 12.5% (2/16) in the FTSG group (p = 0.62). In conclusion, AD-STSG could be an alternative treatment over FTSG for larger joint-involved burn wounds (>200 cm2) owing to lesser donor site morbidity with admissible cosmetic outcomes and functional recovery.

一个三级烧伤中心的回顾性研究:人工真皮与全层皮移植重建关节受损伤创面的比较。
我们的目的是比较关节累及性烧伤患者接受人工真皮层(AD)和裂层皮移植(STSG)或全层皮移植(FTSG)重建的疤痕质量和关节活动恢复率。主要结果为植皮率(SG)。次要结果包括并发症,如感染率和供体部位发病率,使用温哥华疤痕量表(VSS)评估12个月疤痕质量,关节活动的恢复率和需要进一步翻修的疤痕挛缩的发生率。在2021年8月1日至2023年8月1日期间纳入了28名患者。12例患者行AD-STSG, 16例患者行FTSG重建。AD-STSG组和FTSG组SG的中位数为95.0%(四分位数差[IQR] 6.3%)和96.0% (IQR 10.0%) (p = 0.71)。FTSG组12个月疤痕质量明显更好(中位VSS 4.0 [IQR 1.3]对6.0 [IQR1.5], p 200 cm2),因为供体部位发病率较低,美观结果和功能恢复可接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Wound Journal
International Wound Journal DERMATOLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
12.90%
发文量
266
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Editors welcome papers on all aspects of prevention and treatment of wounds and associated conditions in the fields of surgery, dermatology, oncology, nursing, radiotherapy, physical therapy, occupational therapy and podiatry. The Journal accepts papers in the following categories: - Research papers - Review articles - Clinical studies - Letters - News and Views: international perspectives, education initiatives, guidelines and different activities of groups and societies. Calendar of events The Editors are supported by a board of international experts and a panel of reviewers across a range of disciplines and specialties which ensures only the most current and relevant research is published.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信