Miniaturized Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy for Split-Thickness Skin Graft Donor Sites

Abstract

Background Multiple therapeutic options exist for the treatment of split-thickness skin graft (STSG) donor sites, but there is no clear consensus among surgeons about the best option. Negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has rapidly gained in popularity since its invention. Recently, several miniaturized, single-patient NPWT (SP-NPWT) devices have become available. Compared with traditional NPWT devices, SP-NPWT devices are associated with equal wound healing capability and reliability, but offer several advantages. We present a series of 10 consecutive patients whose STSG donor sites were treated with a commercially available SP-NPWT device.

Methods We performed a retrospective review for 10 consecutive patients who underwent STSG procedures and were treated with SP-NPWT devices.

Results From 2015 to 2017, 10 consecutive patients underwent oncologic reconstruction using STSG and had their donor sites treated with SP-NPWT devices. The SP-NPWT dressing had been left in place for 2 weeks after surgery. The average donor site area measured 80 cm² (range: 76–106 cm²). In all 10 patients, the donor sites healed uneventfully and with no complications.

Conclusion Off-the-shelf, miniaturized, SP-NPWT systems appear to be at least as effective as traditional dressings for STSG donor sites and require no maintenance (skilled nursing or dressing changes). Compared with larger and less portable standard NPWT devices, SP-NPWT dressing systems provide a potential cost benefit as well as enhanced convenience and portability.

Keywords

single-patient negative-pressure wound therapy - split-thickness skin graft donor site - vacuum-assisted closure - PICO single-use NPWT system

• References

• 1 Thorne CH, Chung KC, Gosain AK. , et al. Grabb and Smith's Plastic Surgery. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Wiliams & Wilkins; 2013
• 2 Voineskos SH, Ayeni OA, McKnight L, Thoma A. Systematic review of skin graft donor-site dressings. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 124 (01) 298-306
• 3 Morykwas MJ, Argenta LC, Shelton-Brown EI, McGuirt W. Vacuum-assisted closure: a new method for wound control and treatment: animal studies and basic foundation. Ann Plast Surg 1997; 38 (06) 553-562
• 4 Argenta LC, Morykwas MJ. Vacuum-assisted closure: a new method for wound control and treatment: clinical experience. Ann Plast Surg 1997; 38 (06) 563-576
• 5 Payne C, Edwards D. Application of the single use negative pressure wound therapy device (PICO) on a heterogeneous group of surgical and traumatic wounds. Eplasty 2014; 14: e20
• 6 Selvaggi F, Pellino G, Sciaudone G. , et al. New advances in negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for surgical wounds of patients affected with Crohn's disease. Surg Technol Int 2014; 24: 83-89
• 7 Huang C, Leavitt T, Bayer LR, Orgill DP. Effect of negative pressure wound therapy on wound healing. Curr Probl Surg 2014; 51 (07) 301-331
• 8 Trop M, Schintler M, Urban E, Roedl S, Stockenhuber A. Are 1:4 mesh and donor site contraindications for vacuum-assisted closure device?. J Trauma 2006; 61 (05) 1267-1270
• 9 Waltzman JT, Bell DE. Vacuum-assisted closure device as a split-thickness skin graft bolster in the burn population. J Burn Care Res 2014; 35 (05) e338-e342
• 10 Sposato G, Molea G, Di Caprio G, Scioli M, La Rusca I, Ziccardi P. Ambulant vacuum-assisted closure of skin-graft dressing in the lower limbs using a portable mini-VAC device. Br J Plast Surg 2001; 54 (03) 235-237
• 11 Llanos S, Danilla S, Barraza C. , et al. Effectiveness of negative pressure closure in the integration of split thickness skin grafts: a randomized, double-masked, controlled trial. Ann Surg 2006; 244 (05) 700-705
• 12 Petkar KS, Dhanraj P, Kingsly PM. , et al. A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing negative pressure dressing and conventional dressing methods on split-thickness skin grafts in burned patients. Burns 2011; 37 (06) 925-929
• 13 Azzopardi EA, Boyce DE, Dickson WA. , et al. Application of topical negative pressure (vacuum-assisted closure) to split-thickness skin grafts: a structured evidence-based review. Ann Plast Surg 2013; 70 (01) 23-29
• 14 Moisidis E, Heath T, Boorer C, Ho K, Deva AK. A prospective, blinded, randomized, controlled clinical trial of topical negative pressure use in skin grafting. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 114 (04) 917-922
• 15 Genecov DG, Schneider AM, Morykwas MJ, Parker D, White WL, Argenta LC. A controlled subatmospheric pressure dressing increases the rate of skin graft donor site reepithelialization. Ann Plast Surg 1998; 40 (03) 219-225
• 16 Nuutila K, Siltanen A, Peura M. , et al. Gene expression profiling of negative-pressure-treated skin graft donor site wounds. Burns 2013; 39 (04) 687-693
• 17 Malmsjö M, Huddleston E, Martin R. Biological effects of a disposable, canisterless negative pressure wound therapy system. Eplasty 2014; 14: e15
• 18 Pellino G, Sciaudone G, Candilio G, Campitiello F, Selvaggi F, Canonico S. Effects of a new pocket device for negative pressure wound therapy on surgical wounds of patients affected with Crohn's disease: a pilot trial. Surg Innov 2014; 21 (02) 204-212
• 19 Holt R, Murphy J. PICO™ incision closure in oncoplastic breast surgery: a case series. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 2015; 76 (04) 217-223
• 20 Gabriel A, Thimmappa B, Rubano C, Storm-Dickerson T. Evaluation of an ultra-lightweight, single-patient-use negative pressure wound therapy system over dermal regeneration template and skin grafts. Int Wound J 2013; 10 (04) 418-424
• 21 Isaac AL, Rose J, Armstrong DG. Mechanically powered negative pressure wound therapy as a bolster for skin grafting. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2014; 2 (02) e103
• 22 Demaria M, Stanley BJ, Hauptman JG. , et al. Effects of negative pressure wound therapy on healing of open wounds in dogs. Vet Surg 2011; 40 (06) 658-669
• 23 Khanbhai M, Fosah R, Oddy MJ, Richards T. Disposable NPWT device to facilitate early patient discharge following complex DFU. J Wound Care 2012; 21 (04) 180-182