Major Risk Factors Contributing to Split Thickness Skin Graft Failure

Jon D Turissini, Tammer Elmarsafi, K. Evans, P. Kim
{"title":"Major Risk Factors Contributing to Split Thickness Skin Graft Failure","authors":"Jon D Turissini, Tammer Elmarsafi, K. Evans, P. Kim","doi":"10.52504/001c.7755","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A retrospective review was done for each wound (n = 223) in all patients (n = 191) who underwent Split Thickness Skin Graft (STSG) placement in the Wound Division at Georgetown University Hospital from January 2014 to March 2017 in order to determine the factors that significantly affect STSG take. In doing so, these factors that prove to significantly affect STSG take can be used to predict the possibility of graft failure, and, thus, determine if additional measures must be taken in order to improve the success of the skin graft. Patient medical records were examined for patient demographics, comorbidities, wound parameters, wound bed prep, post-operative dressing, 30 day graft outcomes, and 60 day graft outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the significance of each factor, and further analysis was done to determine the association and risk of the statistically significant factors. Statistical analysis showed a significant association between Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) for wound bed dressing after STSG placement and successful STSG outcome compared to use of bolster only for the post-surgical wound (χ2 = 4.66, p=0.0308). The odds of STSG failure in patients who underwent NPWT were approximately 80% less than those who had bolster dressing used for their post-surgical dressing (OR = 0.203). These results indicate that NPWT after skin graft placement yields a greater success rate for split-thickness skin grafts than conventional bolster dressing. In terms of comorbidities, there was also a significant association between congestive heart failure (CHF) and STSG failure (χ2 = 4.12, p=0.0422). Patients with CHF were approximately 2.55 times more likely to have their STSG fail (OR = 2.55), indicating that CHF is a good predictor of split-thickness skin graft failure. It was also found that bacterial presence and STSG failure also showed an association (χ2 = 4.66, p=0.0308), in which patients with bacterial presence on the wound prior to debridement were approximately 2.89 times more likely to have STSG failure (OR = 2.89). Although bacterial presence prior to debridement showed an association with STSG failure, bacterial presence after debridement just prior to STSG placement did not show a significant correlation with STSG failure [nf = 52 (73.2%) versus ns = 95 (62.5%), (p = 0.1150)]. These results suggest that bacterial presence may also be a good predictor of graft failure, however it is possibly the strain of bacteria, not the presence of bacteria that predominantly affects skin graft take. In order to elucidate the role that bacteria plays in the success of STSG take, further experimental analysis is warranted.","PeriodicalId":340325,"journal":{"name":"Georgetown Medical Review","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgetown Medical Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52504/001c.7755","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

A retrospective review was done for each wound (n = 223) in all patients (n = 191) who underwent Split Thickness Skin Graft (STSG) placement in the Wound Division at Georgetown University Hospital from January 2014 to March 2017 in order to determine the factors that significantly affect STSG take. In doing so, these factors that prove to significantly affect STSG take can be used to predict the possibility of graft failure, and, thus, determine if additional measures must be taken in order to improve the success of the skin graft. Patient medical records were examined for patient demographics, comorbidities, wound parameters, wound bed prep, post-operative dressing, 30 day graft outcomes, and 60 day graft outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the significance of each factor, and further analysis was done to determine the association and risk of the statistically significant factors. Statistical analysis showed a significant association between Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) for wound bed dressing after STSG placement and successful STSG outcome compared to use of bolster only for the post-surgical wound (χ2 = 4.66, p=0.0308). The odds of STSG failure in patients who underwent NPWT were approximately 80% less than those who had bolster dressing used for their post-surgical dressing (OR = 0.203). These results indicate that NPWT after skin graft placement yields a greater success rate for split-thickness skin grafts than conventional bolster dressing. In terms of comorbidities, there was also a significant association between congestive heart failure (CHF) and STSG failure (χ2 = 4.12, p=0.0422). Patients with CHF were approximately 2.55 times more likely to have their STSG fail (OR = 2.55), indicating that CHF is a good predictor of split-thickness skin graft failure. It was also found that bacterial presence and STSG failure also showed an association (χ2 = 4.66, p=0.0308), in which patients with bacterial presence on the wound prior to debridement were approximately 2.89 times more likely to have STSG failure (OR = 2.89). Although bacterial presence prior to debridement showed an association with STSG failure, bacterial presence after debridement just prior to STSG placement did not show a significant correlation with STSG failure [nf = 52 (73.2%) versus ns = 95 (62.5%), (p = 0.1150)]. These results suggest that bacterial presence may also be a good predictor of graft failure, however it is possibly the strain of bacteria, not the presence of bacteria that predominantly affects skin graft take. In order to elucidate the role that bacteria plays in the success of STSG take, further experimental analysis is warranted.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
裂厚皮移植失败的主要危险因素
回顾性分析2014年1月至2017年3月在乔治城大学医院创面科接受裂皮植入术(STSG)的所有患者(n = 191)的每个伤口(n = 223),以确定显著影响STSG使用的因素。因此,这些被证明对STSG有显著影响的因素可以用来预测移植失败的可能性,从而确定是否必须采取额外的措施以提高皮肤移植的成功率。检查患者的医疗记录,包括患者人口统计学、合并症、伤口参数、伤口床准备、术后敷料、30天移植物结果和60天移植物结果。统计分析确定各因素的显著性,并进一步分析统计显著因素的相关性和风险。统计分析显示,与仅使用枕垫治疗术后伤口相比,负压伤口治疗(NPWT)放置STSG后伤口床敷料与成功的STSG结果有显著相关性(χ2 = 4.66, p=0.0308)。在接受NPWT的患者中,STSG失败的几率比那些在术后敷料中使用枕形敷料的患者低约80% (OR = 0.203)。这些结果表明,植皮后的NPWT比传统的枕敷料有更高的成功率。在合并症方面,充血性心力衰竭(CHF)与STSG衰竭也存在显著相关性(χ2 = 4.12, p=0.0422)。CHF患者STSG失败的可能性约为2.55倍(OR = 2.55),表明CHF是裂厚皮移植失败的良好预测指标。细菌的存在与STSG失败也存在相关性(χ2 = 4.66, p=0.0308),其中清创前伤口上存在细菌的患者发生STSG失败的可能性约为2.89倍(OR = 2.89)。尽管清创前的细菌存在与STSG失败相关,但在STSG放置前的清创后的细菌存在与STSG失败没有显着相关性[nf = 52(73.2%)对ns = 95 (62.5%), (p = 0.1150)]。这些结果表明,细菌的存在也可能是移植失败的一个很好的预测因素,然而,可能是细菌的菌株,而不是细菌的存在,主要影响皮肤移植的效果。为了阐明细菌在STSG治疗成功中的作用,需要进一步的实验分析。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Fostering open dialogue: Creating safe spaces for adolescents to discuss sexual health Review of minimally disruptive in vitro fertilization (IVF) approaches as a strategy for assisted human conception Does Propecia Cause More Harms than Good: Assessing Reproductive and Non-Reproductive Effects of Finasteride on Male Health Computer-mediated Communication and Healthcare Satisfaction among Middle-aged Men Living with or without HIV The Use of Stem Cells in Cardiac Pathologies: A Review
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1