Glycerol treatment as recovery procedure for cryopreserved human skin allografts positive for bacteria and fungi

Human donor skin allografts are suitable and much used temporary biological (burn) wound dressings. They prepare the excised wound bed for final autografting and form an excellent substrate for revascularisation and for the formation of granulation tissue. Two preservation methods, glycerol preservation and cryopreservation, are commonly used by tissue banks for the long-term storage of skin grafts. The burn surgeons of the Queen Astrid Military Hospital preferentially use partly viable cryopreserved skin allografts. After mandatory 14-day bacterial and mycological culture, however, approximately 15% of the cryopreserved skin allografts cannot be released from quarantine because of positive culture. To maximize the use of our scarce and precious donor skin, we developed a glycerolisation-based recovery method for these culture positive cryopreserved allografts. The inactivation and preservation method, described in this paper, allowed for an efficient inactivation of the colonising bacteria and fungi, with the exception of spore-formers, and did not influence the structural and functional aspects of the skin allografts

Variation in the provision and practice of implant-based breast reconstruction in the UK: Results from the iBRA national practice questionnaire

Introduction The introduction of biological and synthetic meshes has revolutionised the practice of implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) but evidence for effectiveness is lacking. The iBRA (implant Breast Reconstruction evAluation) study is a national trainee-led project that aims to explore the practice and outcomes of IBBR to inform the design of a future trial. We report the results of the iBRA National Practice Questionnaire (NPQ) which aimed to comprehensively describe the provision and practice of IBBR across the UK. Methods A questionnaire investigating local practice and service provision of IBBR developed by the iBRA Steering Group was completed by trainee and consultant leads at breast and plastic surgical units across the UK. Summary data for each survey item were calculated and variation between centres and overall provision of care examined. Results 81 units within 79 NHS-hospitals completed the questionnaire. Units offered a range of reconstructive techniques, with IBBR accounting for 70% (IQR:50–80%) of participating units' immediate procedures. Units on average were staffed by 2.5 breast surgeons (IQR:2.0–3.0) and 2.0 plastic surgeons (IQR:1.0–3.0) performing 35 IBBR cases per year (IQR:20-50). Variation was demonstrated in the provision of novel different techniques for IBBR especially the use of biological (n = 62) and synthetic (n = 25) meshes and in patient selection for these procedures. Conclusions The iBRA-NPQ has demonstrated marked variation in the provision and practice of IBBR in the UK. The prospective audit phase of the iBRA study will determine the safety and effectiveness of different approaches to IBBR and allow evidence-based best practice to be explored

Variations in Clinical Audit Collection: A Survey of Plastic Surgery Units Across the British Isles

INTRODUCTION Clinical audit is a requirement of good medical and surgical practice and is central to the UK Government's plans to modernise the NHS. MATERIALS AND METHODS A survey was conducted to assess clinical audit data collection and collation within plastic surgery departments across the UK. The survey identified a variety of different data collection and collation methods, with extensive differences between plastic surgery departments. Those responsible for data collection and its funding were also identified by the survey. RESULTS Results were obtained from 45 plastic surgery departments. Of the 45 departments surveyed, 12 collect data prospectively, whereas 26 units collect data retrospectively. The remaining departments collect data using a combination of methods. Of the units surveyed, 28 collect data on paper-based systems, with only 13 units using electronic applications. The personnel responsible for data collection were identified as being junior doctors. Departments collecting data prospectively do so from a greater number of sources than those collecting data retrospectively. CONCLUSIONS This survey has focused on plastic surgery. The authors believe that similar results would be obtained from a survey of other surgical specialties. A huge variation in all parameters relating to the collection and collation of clinical audit data is seen. There are few standards within this specialty for data collection. Much work must be done in order to reach targets set by the UK Governmen