2 research outputs found

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

    Get PDF
    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

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

    Get PDF
    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
    corecore