Comparative study between split thickness skin graft and split thickness dermal graft in coverage of raw areas | ||
| The Egyptian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery | ||
| Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available Online from 16 October 2022 | ||
| Document Type: Review Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/ejprs.2022.165438.1212 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Ahmed Emad Eldin* 1; Mohammed Salah Abdel basset2; reham ebraheem hashem3; abdelnasser mohamed elnaggar4; emad mohamed hawas5 | ||
| 1Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department, Beni Suef University. | ||
| 2Plastic and reconstructive surgery Department faculty of medicine Beni suef university | ||
| 3department of plastic and reconstructive surgery , Beni- Suef University | ||
| 4department of plastic and reconstructive surgery, Beni- Suef University | ||
| 5Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Beni Suef University | ||
| Abstract | ||
| ABSTRACT Background: Loss of skin integrity is one of the most common problems in Plastic surgery. Split thickness skin graft is the gold standard in coverage of raw areas but it carries multiple complications like donor site morbidity. The dermal graft may add another autologous option for wound coverage with a concealed donor site scar. The aim of our study is to assess the safety, limitations, and complications of split thickness dermal graft in coverage of raw areas and to compare it to the standard Split thickness skin graft. Patients and Methods: The study was conducted on 38 patients with raw areas, who attended the outpatient clinics and emergency department of plastic surgery department, Beni-Suef University hospital between October 2019 to October 2021. The mean age was 50 years (range 5-55 years). Raw areas were divided and covered by both split thickness dermal graft (STDG) and split thickness skin graft (STSG). Comparison of donor and recipient site of dermal graft and the standard skin graft was documented using POSAS (Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale) Results: The Split Thickness skin graft take was complete in 37/38 cases. While Split Dermal Graft Take was complete in 33/38 patients. Most Dermal graft failure occured in large raw areas. The scar of the dermal graft donor site was better than the standard skin graft donor site regarding pain, itching, color, and texture using POSAS. Conclusion: Split thickness dermal graft had proved to be a valuable adjunct and wholly autologous option in achieving permanent raw areas coverage with decreased donor site morbidity, especially in small sized raw areas. Keywords: graft - Dermal - raw - area. Financial Support and Sponsorship: Nil. Conflicts of Interest: There are no conflicts of interest. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| graft; Dermal; raw; area | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 146 |
||
