Split-skin graft in the management of diabetic foot ulcers
Soba University Hospital, Khartoum, Sudan. Journal of Wound Care
(Impact Factor: 1.07).
07/2008; 17(7):303-6. DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2008.17.7.30522
To compare the effects of split-thickness skin grafts versus a conservative wound dressing on the healing times of diabetic foot ulcers and the length of hospital stay.
In this prospective case-controlled study, 50 patients consented to skin grafting (graft group) and 50 preferred to be managed by conservative dressings (control group). Wound management in both groups was standardised with regard to the dressing materials (which comprised a multilayer dressing including paraffin gauze and diluted povidone-iodine soaked gauze), wound care and surgeon involvement. Graft take, ulcer recurrence rate and donor-site morbidity were assessed. Healing times and the length of hospital stay were compared between the two groups.
A 100% skin graft take was recorded in 84% of the patients on the fifth postoperative day and in 62% on weeks 3 and 8. All patients in the graft group healed completely, but 8% had an ulcer recurrence and 4% a superficial infection within the following year. The mean healing time and mean length of hospital stay were significantly less in the graft group compared with the control group (p<0.001), reflecting results of similar studies.
Split-skin grafting is an effective method of managing diabetic foot ulcers as, compared with the conservative dressings used in this study, it reduced healing times and the length of hospital stay, while donor-site morbidity was minimal.
Available from: Thierry Burnouf
- "The effect of split-thickness skin grafts versus a conservative wound dressing on the healing times of diabetic foot ulcers has also been studied. The results showed that a 100% skin graft take was recorded in 84% of the patients on the fifth postoperative day and in 62% on weeks 3 and 8, but 8% had ulcer recurrence and 4% a superficial infection within the following year . Comparing to these previous studies, our results suggest that combining PRP and skin graft enhances the efficacy of treating chronic diabetic wounds by enhancing healing rate and decreasing recurrence rate. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Lower extremity ulcers in diabetic patients are difficult to treat. Recently, the use of human blood platelet-derived components in this indication has been raising interest. In this study, we have evaluated the safety and efficacy of the combination of autologous platelet gel (PG) and skin graft for treating large size recalcitrant ulcers. Eight consecutive diabetic patients aged 25 to 82 with nine nonhealing lower extremity ulcers (median size of 50 cm(2); range 15-150 cm(2)) were treated. Skin ulcer was debrided, and the wound was sprayed after 7 to 10 days with autologous platelet-rich plasma and thrombin. Thin split-thickness skin graft with multiple slits was then applied on the wound bed and fixed with staples or cat-gut sutures. There were no adverse reactions observed during the study. Eight out of 9 skin grafts took well. The interval between skin graft and complete wound healing ranged from 2 to 3 weeks in the 8 successful cases. No ulcer recurrence was noted in those patients during the follow-up period of 2 to 19 months. In this study, the combination of autologous platelet gel and skin grafting has proven beneficial to heal large-size recalcitrant ulcers.
BioMed Research International 03/2013; 2013:837620. DOI:10.1155/2013/837620 · 2.71 Impact Factor
Available from: Maged N Shaddad
- "The duration of antibiotic therapy may be shortened considerably after surgical intervention (27). Split thickness skin grafting has also been shown to be an effective method of managing diabetic foot ulcers as compared to conservative wound dressings by reducing healing times and length of hospital stay with minimal donor-site morbidity (28). "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Diabetic foot infections are a high risk for lower extremity amputation in patients with dense peripheral neuropathy and/or peripheral vascular disease. When they present with concomitant osteomyelitis, it poses a great challenge to the surgical and medical teams with continuing debates regarding the treatment strategy. A cohort prospective study conducted between October 2005 and October 2010 included 330 diabetic patients with osteomyelitis mainly involving the forefoot (study group) and 1,808 patients without foot osteomyelitis (control group). Diagnosis of osteomyelitis was based on probing to bone test with bone cultures for microbiological studies and/or repeated plain radiographic findings. Surgical treatment included debridement, sequestrectomy, resections of metatarsal and digital bones, or toe amputation. Antibiotics were started as empirical and modified according to the final culture and sensitivities for all patients. Patients were followed for at least 1 year after wound healing. The mean age of the study group was 56.7 years (SD = 11.4) compared to the control group of 56.3 years (SD = 12.1), while the male to female ratio was 3:1. At initial presentation, 82.1% (n=271) of the study group had an ulcer penetrating the bone or joint level. The most common pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus (33.3%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (32.2%), and Escherichia coli (22.2%) with an almost similar pattern in the control group. In the study group, wound healing occurred in less than 6 months in 73% of patients compared to 89.9% in the control group. In the study group, 52 patients (15.8%) had a major lower extremity amputation versus 61 in the control group (3.4%) (P=0.001). During the postoperative follow-up visits, 12.1% of patients in each group developed wound recurrence. In conclusion, combined surgical and medical treatment for diabetic foot osteomyelitis can achieve acceptable limb salvage rate and also reduce the duration of time to healing along with the duration of antibiotic treatment and wound recurrence rate.
Diabetic Foot and Ankle 10/2012; 3. DOI:10.3402/dfa.v3i0.18809
Available from: Brant L Mccartan
- "Further analysis of the articles showed that graft size, donor and recipient location, patient age, gender, and race did not Effect graft survival per Ramanujam . Most, (60%) of the patients in Mahmoud's study had a wound size between five and ten centimeters; there was no mention of wound location, depth, diabetic control, or vascular status . Also, in the Puttirutvong study: depth, location, diabetic control, & vascular status were not addressed. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Diabetic foot ulcerations are historically difficult to treat despite advanced therapeutic modalities. There are numerous modalities described in the literature ranging from noninvasive topical wound care to more invasive surgical procedures such as primary closure, skin flaps, and skin grafting. While skin grafting provides faster time to closure with a single treatment compared to traditional topical wound treatments, the potential risks of donor site morbidity and poor wound healing unique to the diabetic state have been cited as a contraindication to its widespread use. In order to garner clarity on this issue, a literature review was undertaken on the use of split-thickness skin grafts on diabetic foot ulcers. Search of electronic databases yielded four studies that reported split-thickness skin grafts as definitive means of closure. In addition, several other studies employed split-thickness skin grafts as an adjunct to a treatment that was only partially successful or used to fill in the donor site of another plastic surgery technique. When used as the primary closure on optimized diabetic foot ulcerations, split-thickness skin grafts are 78% successful at closing 90% of the wound by eight weeks.
05/2012; 2012:715273. DOI:10.1155/2012/715273
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.