Cargando…

A Case Series of Complex Recalcitrant Wounds Treated with Epidermal Grafts Harvested from an Automated Device

Introduction: Epidermal grafting has several advantages over full-thickness or split-thickness grafts in the treatment of complex non-healing wounds. These include the low risk of donor site complications, minimal patient discomfort, and abstention from the operating room. Traditionally, the lack of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cai, Stephen S, Gowda, Arvind U, Chopra, Karan, Waldman, Rachel, Silverman, Ronald P, Rasko, Yvonne M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5130354/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27909641
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.853
_version_ 1782470716665364480
author Cai, Stephen S
Gowda, Arvind U
Chopra, Karan
Waldman, Rachel
Silverman, Ronald P
Rasko, Yvonne M
author_facet Cai, Stephen S
Gowda, Arvind U
Chopra, Karan
Waldman, Rachel
Silverman, Ronald P
Rasko, Yvonne M
author_sort Cai, Stephen S
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Epidermal grafting has several advantages over full-thickness or split-thickness grafts in the treatment of complex non-healing wounds. These include the low risk of donor site complications, minimal patient discomfort, and abstention from the operating room. Traditionally, the lack of reliable epidermal harvesting techniques has limited its clinical utilization. The development of an automated suction blister epidermal graft (SBEG) harvesting device may facilitate clinical utilization of this technique. The authors present a case series of multimorbid patients who were poor surgical candidates and were treated with this technique. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients treated with CelluTome™​ Epidermal Harvesting System (KCI, an Acelity company, San Antonio, TX) prior to May 2016 at our institution was conducted. Results: A total of 12 patients underwent 14 epidermal grafting procedures. Multiple comorbidities were identified, including smoking (33%), immunosuppression by immunotherapy or steroids (25%), chronic venous insufficiency (25%), diabetes mellitus (25%), malignancy (25%), polysubstance abuse (17%), HIV/AIDS (17%), and peripheral artery disease (8%). Among the two acute wounds (≤ 3 months) and 10 chronic wounds, the average wound size was 49.1 cm(2) (± 77.6 cm(2)) and the median wound duration was 5.7 months (interquartile range: 4.1 - 15.8 months) before SBEG was attempted. These complex wounds had failed prior therapies, such as local wound care (100%), incision and drainage (58%), vacuum-assisted closure (33%), split-thickness skin graft (16%), and hyperbaric oxygen (8%). Following the procedure, all donor sites healed within one week. Three patients were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining nine patients, four patients had complete resolution of their wounds at a median follow-up of 13.1 weeks (interquartile range: 6.8-17.3 weeks). Among those with partial resolutions, the average wound size was 4.2 cm(2) (± 2.1 cm(2)) with an average wound reduction of 79% (± 23%). No donor or recipient site complications were observed. Conclusions: The automated SBEG harvesting device is an effective and safe option for treating complex non-healing wounds in multimorbid patients who may be poor surgical candidates. This procedure demonstrates minimal contraindications to its use and donor or recipient site complications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5130354
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51303542016-12-01 A Case Series of Complex Recalcitrant Wounds Treated with Epidermal Grafts Harvested from an Automated Device Cai, Stephen S Gowda, Arvind U Chopra, Karan Waldman, Rachel Silverman, Ronald P Rasko, Yvonne M Cureus Plastic Surgery Introduction: Epidermal grafting has several advantages over full-thickness or split-thickness grafts in the treatment of complex non-healing wounds. These include the low risk of donor site complications, minimal patient discomfort, and abstention from the operating room. Traditionally, the lack of reliable epidermal harvesting techniques has limited its clinical utilization. The development of an automated suction blister epidermal graft (SBEG) harvesting device may facilitate clinical utilization of this technique. The authors present a case series of multimorbid patients who were poor surgical candidates and were treated with this technique. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients treated with CelluTome™​ Epidermal Harvesting System (KCI, an Acelity company, San Antonio, TX) prior to May 2016 at our institution was conducted. Results: A total of 12 patients underwent 14 epidermal grafting procedures. Multiple comorbidities were identified, including smoking (33%), immunosuppression by immunotherapy or steroids (25%), chronic venous insufficiency (25%), diabetes mellitus (25%), malignancy (25%), polysubstance abuse (17%), HIV/AIDS (17%), and peripheral artery disease (8%). Among the two acute wounds (≤ 3 months) and 10 chronic wounds, the average wound size was 49.1 cm(2) (± 77.6 cm(2)) and the median wound duration was 5.7 months (interquartile range: 4.1 - 15.8 months) before SBEG was attempted. These complex wounds had failed prior therapies, such as local wound care (100%), incision and drainage (58%), vacuum-assisted closure (33%), split-thickness skin graft (16%), and hyperbaric oxygen (8%). Following the procedure, all donor sites healed within one week. Three patients were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining nine patients, four patients had complete resolution of their wounds at a median follow-up of 13.1 weeks (interquartile range: 6.8-17.3 weeks). Among those with partial resolutions, the average wound size was 4.2 cm(2) (± 2.1 cm(2)) with an average wound reduction of 79% (± 23%). No donor or recipient site complications were observed. Conclusions: The automated SBEG harvesting device is an effective and safe option for treating complex non-healing wounds in multimorbid patients who may be poor surgical candidates. This procedure demonstrates minimal contraindications to its use and donor or recipient site complications. Cureus 2016-10-30 /pmc/articles/PMC5130354/ /pubmed/27909641 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.853 Text en Copyright © 2016, Cai et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Plastic Surgery
Cai, Stephen S
Gowda, Arvind U
Chopra, Karan
Waldman, Rachel
Silverman, Ronald P
Rasko, Yvonne M
A Case Series of Complex Recalcitrant Wounds Treated with Epidermal Grafts Harvested from an Automated Device
title A Case Series of Complex Recalcitrant Wounds Treated with Epidermal Grafts Harvested from an Automated Device
title_full A Case Series of Complex Recalcitrant Wounds Treated with Epidermal Grafts Harvested from an Automated Device
title_fullStr A Case Series of Complex Recalcitrant Wounds Treated with Epidermal Grafts Harvested from an Automated Device
title_full_unstemmed A Case Series of Complex Recalcitrant Wounds Treated with Epidermal Grafts Harvested from an Automated Device
title_short A Case Series of Complex Recalcitrant Wounds Treated with Epidermal Grafts Harvested from an Automated Device
title_sort case series of complex recalcitrant wounds treated with epidermal grafts harvested from an automated device
topic Plastic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5130354/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27909641
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.853
work_keys_str_mv AT caistephens acaseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT gowdaarvindu acaseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT choprakaran acaseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT waldmanrachel acaseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT silvermanronaldp acaseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT raskoyvonnem acaseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT caistephens caseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT gowdaarvindu caseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT choprakaran caseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT waldmanrachel caseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT silvermanronaldp caseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice
AT raskoyvonnem caseseriesofcomplexrecalcitrantwoundstreatedwithepidermalgraftsharvestedfromanautomateddevice