Regrafting of the Split-Thickness Skin Graft Donor-Site: Is It Beneficial?

Split-thickness skin grafting remains a fundamental treatment for patients with deep burns and other traumatic injuries. Unfortunately, the donor site wound that remains after split skin graft (SSG) harvesting may also cause problems for the patient; they can lead to discomfort and scars with a poor cosmetic outcome. Regrafting of the donor site is one of the methods described to improve donor site healing and scarring. In this report, we describe a case of a 26-year-old woman with a self-inflicted chemical burn (0.5% TBSA) who underwent split skin grafting. During surgery, only part of the donor site was regrafted with split skin graft remnants. This part healed faster and had a better scar quality at 3 months postsurgery. Nevertheless, the appearance and patients' opinion on the regrafted part deteriorated after 12 months. With this case report, we aim to create awareness of the long-term consequences of regrafting, which may differ from short-time results. Patients expected to have poor reepithelialization potential may benefit from regrafting of the SSG on the donor site. But in healthy young individuals, timewise there would be no benefit since it can lead to an aesthetically displeasing result

Evaluation of measurement properties of health-related quality of life instruments for burns: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (HRQL) is a key outcome in the evaluation of burn treatment. Health-related quality of life instruments with robust measurement properties are required to provide high-quality evidence to improve patient care. The aim of this review was to critically appraise the measurement properties of HRQL instruments used in burns. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Google scholar to reveal articles on the development and/or validation of HRQL instruments in burns. Measurement properties were assessed using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments methodology. A modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation analysis was used to assess risk of bias (prospero ID, CRD42016048065). RESULTS: Forty-three articles covering 15 HRQL instruments (12 disease-specific and 3 generic instruments) were included. Methodological quality and evidence on measurement properties varied widely. None of the instruments provided enough evidence on their measurement properties to be highly recommended for routine use; however, two instruments had somewhat more favorable measurement properties. The Burn-Specific Health Scale-Brief (BSHS-B) is easy to use, widely accessible, and demonstrated sufficient evidence for most measurement properties. The Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profiles were the only instruments with high-quality evidence for content validity. CONCLUSION: The Burn Specific Health Scale-Brief (burn-specific HRQL) and the Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile (burn scar HRQL) instruments have the best measurement properties. There is only weak evidence on the measurement properties of generic HRQL instruments in burn patients. Results of this study form important input to reach consensus on a universally used instrument to assess HRQL in burn patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, level III

Application of hydrosurgery for burn wound debridement: An 8-year cohort analysis

Introduction: During the last decade, the Versajet™ hydrosurgery system has become popular as a tool for tangential excision in burn surgery. Although hydrosurgery is thought to be a more precise and controlled manner for burn debridement prior to skin grafting, burn specialists decide individually whether hydrosurgery should be applied in a specific patient or not. The aim of this study was to gain insight in which patients hydrosurgery is used in specialized burn care in the Netherlands. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted in all patients admitted to a Dutch burn centre between 2009 and 2016. All patients with burns that underwent surgical debridement were included. Data were collected using the national Dutch Burn Repository R3. Results: Data of 2113 eligible patients were assessed. These patients were treated with hydrosurgical debridement (23.9%), conventional debridement (47.7%) or a combination of these techniques (28.3%). Independent predictors for the use of hydrosurgery were a younger age, scalds, a larger percentage of total body surface area (TBSA) burned, head and neck burns and arm burns. Differences in surgical management and clinical outcome were found between the three groups. Conclusion: The use of hydrosurgery for burn wound debridement prior to skin grafting is substantial. Independent predictors for the use of hydrosurgery were mainly burn related and consisted of a younger age, scalds, a larger TBSA burned, and burns on irregularly contoured body areas. Randomized studies addressing scar quality are needed to open new perspectives on the potential benefits of hydrosurgical burn wound debridement

Patient-reported scar quality of donor-sites following split-skin grafting in burn patients: Long-term results of a prospective cohort study

Background: Skin grafting is the current gold standard for treatment of deeper burns. How patients appraise the donor-site scar is poorly investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term patient-reported quality of donor-site scars after split skin grafting and identify possible predictors. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted. Patients were included in a Dutch burn centre during one year. Patient-reported quality of donor-site scars and their worst burn scar was assessed at 12 months using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). Mixed model analyses were used to identify predictors of scar quality. Results: This study included 115 donor-site scars of 72 patients with a mean TBSA burned of 11.2%. The vast majority of the donor-site scars (84.4%) were rated as having at least minor differences with normal skin (POSAS item score ≥2) on one or more scar characteristics and the

Long-term scar quality after hydrosurgical versus conventional debridement of deep dermal burns (HyCon trial): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Deep dermal burns require tangential excision of non-viable tissue and skin grafting to improve wound healing and burn-scar quality. Tangential excision is conventionally performed with a knife, but during the last decade hydrosurgery has become popular as a new tool for tangential excision. Hydrosurgery is generally thought to be a more precise and controlled manner of burn debridement leading to preservation of viable tissue and, therefore, better scar quality. Although scar quality is considered to be one of the most important outcomes in burn surgery today, no randomized controlled study has compared the effect of these two common treatment modalities with scar quality as a primary outcome. The aim of this study is, therefore, to compare long-term scar quality after hydrosurgical versus conventional tangential excision in deep dermal burns. Methods/design: A multicenter, randomized, intra-patient, controlled trial will be conducted in the Dutch burn centers of Rotterdam, Beverwijk, and Groningen. All patients with deep dermal burns that require excision and grafting are eligible. Exclusion criteria are: a burn wound 30%, full-thickness burns, chemical or electrical burns, infected wounds (clinical symptoms in combination with positive wound swabs), insufficient knowledge of the Dutch or English language, patients that are unlikely to comply with requirements of the study protocol and follow-up, and patients who are (temporarily) incompetent because of sedation and/or intubation. A total of 137 patients will be included. Comparable wound areas A and B will be appointed, randomized and either excised conventionally with a knife or with the hydrosurgery system. The primary outcome is scar quality measured by the observer score of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS); a subjective scar-assessment instrument, consisting of two separate six-item scales (observer and patient) that are both scored on a 10-point rating scale. Discussion: This study will contribute to the optimal surgi

Course of scar quality of donor sites following split skin graft harvesting: Comparison between patients and observers

There exists little to no data on the development of donor-site scars that remain after split skin graft harvesting. The objectives of this study were to (a) examine changes in characteristics of donor-site scar quality over time and (b) assess the agreement between patient-reported and observer-reported donor-site scar quality in a burn population. A prospective cohort study was conducted including patients who underwent split skin grafting for their burn injury. Patients and observers completed the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) for the first harvested donor site at 3 and 12 months post-surgery. This study included 80 patients with a median age of 34 years. At 3 months post-surgery, the patients scored the POSAS items itch and color as most deviant from normal skin, both improved between 3 and 12 months (3.1 vs 1.5 and 5.0 vs 3.5, respectively [P <.001]). Other scar characteristics did not show significant change over time. The patients' overall opinion score improved from 3.9 to 3.2 (P <.001). Observers rated the items vascularization and pigmentation most severe, only vascularization improved significantly between both time points. Their overall opinion score decreased from 2.7 to 2.3 (P <.001). The inter-observer agreement between patients and observers was considered poor (ICC < 0.4) at both time points. Results of current study indicate that observers underestimate the impact of donor-site scars. This has to b

Brandwonddiepte bepalen met laser-Doppler-imaging

Voor het instellen van de optimale therapie van brandwonden – conservatief of operatief – is een vroege, accurate bepaling van de brandwonddiepte belangrijk. ‘Laser Doppler imaging’ (LDI ) is een techniek waarmee een nauwkeurige inschatting van de brandwonddiepte kan worden gemaakt door het meten van de dermale perfusie. Hoewel is aangetoond dat de keuze voor het wel of niet verrichten van een operatie met LDI eerder kan worden gemaakt, heeft dit niet geleid tot een kortere tijd tot wondgenezing of kostenbesparing in de Nederlandse brandwondenzorg. LDI wordt in alle Nederlandse brandwondencentra gebruikt. Bij twijfel over de brandwonddiepte in de eerste of tweede lijn is doorverwijzing naar een brandwondencentrum raadzaam