Abstract
Introduction
In both partial thickness burns and skin graft donor sites, coverage with Polylactide-based copolymer dressing (PLBC dressing) has been shown to result in expedited healing and improved pain outcomes when compared to more traditional techniques. These advantages are generally attributed to the way in which PLBC remains as an intact coating over the wound bed throughout the healing process, protecting wounds from the contamination and microtraumas associated with changes more conventional dressings. At our institution, we began selectively utilizing PLBC as a means of securing and protecting fresh skin graft, in hopes that we would find similar benefits in this application.
Methods
Clinical Protocol-- The PLBC dressing was used at the attending surgeon’s discretion. In these cases, meshed STSG was placed over prepared wound beds. Staples were not utilized. PLBC dressing was then placed over the entirety of the graft surface, securing graft in place by adhering to wound bed through intercises. (Staples were not used.) The graft and PLBC complex was further dressed with a layer of non-adherent cellulose based liner with petroleum based lubricant, and an outer layer of cotton gauze placed as a wrap or bolster. Post operatively, the outer layer (“wrap”) of gauze was replaced as needed for saturation. The PLBC and adherent “inner” liner were left in place until falling off naturally over the course of outpatient follow-up.
Retrospective Review-- With IRB approval, patients treated PLBC over STSG between April 2018 to March 2019 were identified via surgeon’s log and pulled for review. Documentation gathered from operative notes, progress notes (inpatient and outpatient) and clinical photography was used to identify demographics, mechanism of injury, depth, total body surface area percentage (TBSA%), size of area treated with PLBC dressing, graft loss, need for re-grafting, signs of wound infection, antibiotic treatment, and length of stay.
Results
Twenty-two patients had STSG secured and dressed with PLBC. Median patient age was 36.5 years. Median TBSA was 5.1%, and median treated area 375 cm2. Follow up ranged from 21 to 232 days post-operatively, with two patients lost to follow up. All patients seen in outpatient follow up were noted to have “complete graft take” or “minimal” graft. None of the areas treated with PLBC dressing required re-grafting. There were no unplanned readmissions, and no wound infections were diagnosed or treated. Practitioners in in-patient setting and in follow up clinic reported satisfaction with the PLBC dressing.
Conclusions
The PLBC dressing was a feasible solution for securing and dressings STSGs. Future work is needed to determine whether its use is associated with an improvement in patient outcomes.
Cause and outcome of aborting a difficult cholecystectomy: a study of operative notes
