scholarly journals Wound Coverage Technologies in Burn Care

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 612-620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc G. Jeschke ◽  
Celeste C. Finnerty ◽  
Shahriar Shahrokhi ◽  
Ludwik K. Branski ◽  
Manuel Dibildox
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Marc G. Jeschke ◽  
Shahriar Shahrokhi ◽  
Celeste C. Finnerty ◽  
Ludwik K. Branski ◽  
Manuel Dibildox
Keyword(s):  

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 348
Author(s):  
Michael Kohlhauser ◽  
Hanna Luze ◽  
Sebastian Philipp Nischwitz ◽  
Lars Peter Kamolz

Autologous skin grafting was developed more than 3500 years ago. Several approaches and techniques have been discovered and established in burn care since then. Great achievements were made during the 19th and 20th century. Many of these techniques are still part of the surgical burn care. Today, autologous skin grafting is still considered to be the gold standard for burn wound coverage. The present paper gives an overview about the evolution of skin grafting and its usage in burn care nowadays.


2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. e103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin C. Robson
Keyword(s):  

1986 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irving Feller ◽  
Claudella A. Jones
Keyword(s):  

1992 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 561-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph M. Rees ◽  
Alan R. Dimick
Keyword(s):  

1986 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard P. Harmel ◽  
Dennis W. Vane ◽  
Denis R. King
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 476
Author(s):  
Ioana Tichil ◽  
Samara Rosenblum ◽  
Eldho Paul ◽  
Heather Cleland

Objective: To determine blood transfusion practices, risk factors, and outcomes associated with the use of blood products in the setting of the acute management of burn patients at the Victorian Adult Burn Service. Background: Patients with burn injuries have variable transfusion requirements, based on a multitude of factors. We reviewed all acute admissions to the Victorian Adult Burns Service (VABS) between 2011 and 2017: 1636 patients in total, of whom 948 had surgery and were the focus of our analysis. Method and results: Patient demographics, surgical management, transfusion details, and outcome parameters were collected and analyzed. A total of 175 patients out of the 948 who had surgery also had a blood transfusion, while 52% of transfusions occurred in the perioperative period. The median trigger haemoglobin in perioperative was 80mg/dL (IQR = 76–84.9 mg/dL), and in the non-perioperative setting was 77 mg/dL (IQR = 71.61–80.84 mg/dL). Age, gender, % total body surface area (TBSA) burn, number of surgeries, and intensive care unit and hospital length of stay were associated with transfusion. Conclusions: The use of blood transfusions is an essential component of the surgical management of major burns. As observed in our study, half of these transfusions are related to surgical procedures and may be influenced by the employment of blood conserving strategies. Furthermore, transfusion trigger levels in stable patients may be amenable to review and reduction. Risk adjusted analysis can support the implementation of blood transfusion as a useful quality indicator in burn care.


Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 380
Author(s):  
Deepak K. Ozhathil ◽  
Michael W. Tay ◽  
Steven E. Wolf ◽  
Ludwik K. Branski

Thermal injuries have been a phenomenon intertwined with the human condition since the dawn of our species. Autologous skin translocation, also known as skin grafting, has played an important role in burn wound management and has a rich history of its own. In fact, some of the oldest known medical texts describe ancient methods of skin translocation. In this article, we examine how skin grafting has evolved from its origins of necessity in the ancient world to the well-calibrated tool utilized in modern medicine. The popularity of skin grafting has ebbed and flowed multiple times throughout history, often suppressed for cultural, religious, pseudo-scientific, or anecdotal reasons. It was not until the 1800s, that skin grafting was widely accepted as a safe and effective treatment for wound management, and shortly thereafter for burn injuries. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries skin grafting advanced considerably, accelerated by exponential medical progress and the occurrence of man-made disasters and global warfare. The introduction of surgical instruments specifically designed for skin grafting gave surgeons more control over the depth and consistency of harvested tissues, vastly improving outcomes. The invention of powered surgical instruments, such as the electric dermatome, reduced technical barriers for many surgeons, allowing the practice of skin grafting to be extended ubiquitously from a small group of technically gifted reconstructive surgeons to nearly all interested sub-specialists. The subsequent development of biologic and synthetic skin substitutes have been spurred onward by the clinical challenges unique to burn care: recurrent graft failure, microbial wound colonization, and limited donor site availability. These improvements have laid the framework for more advanced forms of tissue engineering including micrografts, cultured skin grafts, aerosolized skin cell application, and stem-cell impregnated dermal matrices. In this article, we will explore the convoluted journey that modern skin grafting has taken and potential future directions the procedure may yet go.


2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S142-S142
Author(s):  
Theresa L Chin ◽  
Rita Frerk ◽  
Victor C Joe ◽  
Sara Sabeti ◽  
Kimberly Burton ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction The COVID19 pandemic has led to anxiety and fears for the general public. People were concerned about coming to a medical facility where the virus might be transmitted. Furthermore, stay-at-home orders that were implemented during the pandemic did not apply to clinic visits but contributed to people staying at home even for medical care. We hypothesized that there were delays in burn care due to the pandemic. Methods We queried our clinic data for number of clinic visits and new burn evaluations by month. Patients referred to our clinic from March 15, 2020 to Sept 15, 2020 were reviewed for time of presentation after injury. Days from injury date to clinic referral date and days from clinic referral date to appointment date were calculated. Patients who were referred but did not show and were not seen in our ED were not included because injury date could not be determined. Univariate analysis was performed. Results As seen in Figure 1, our in-person clinic volume decreased in April and May 2020 but rebounded in June 2020 as compared to the number of clinic visits for the same months last year. Similarly, in Figure 2, our new burn evaluations decreased in April and May 2020 compared to our new burn volume from 2019. However, our video telehealth visits increased in March and April then decreased in June-August. Conclusions Our burn clinic remained open to see patients with burn injury throughout the pandemic, however, clinic visits were delayed early in the pandemic. While we had an increase in video telehealth, it does not account for the decrease in clinic visits. This may be due to low enrollment in the electronic medical record encrypted communication platform and/or limited knowledge/access to the technology. Additional care may have been informally given via telephone but not well captured. Furthermore, burn care was delivered in the following months. Additional investigation is necessary to see if the incidence of burn injury decreased.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document