PMID- 25162948
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20151125
LR  - 20180302
IS  - 1559-0488 (Electronic)
IS  - 1559-047X (Linking)
VI  - 36
IP  - 2
DP  - 2015 Mar-Apr
TI  - Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing two methods of securing skin 
      grafts using negative pressure wound therapy: vacuum-assisted closure and gauze 
      suction.
PG  - 324-8
LID - 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000089 [doi]
AB  - Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has revolutionized the management of 
      complicated wounds and has contributed an additional modality for securing split 
      thickness skin grafts (STSG). The standard for NPWT is the vacuum-assisted 
      closure (VAC) device. The authors' institution has accumulated experience using 
      standard gauze sealed with an occlusive dressing and wall suction (GSUC) as their 
      primary mode for NPWT. The authors report a randomized controlled trial comparing 
      the efficacy of the GSUC vs the VAC in securing STSG. A prospective, randomized, 
      controlled trial was conducted in 157 wounds in 104 patients requiring STSG from 
      August 2009 to July 2012. All wounds were randomized to VAC or GSUC treatment and 
      assessed for skin graft adherence/take. At postoperative day 4 or 5, NPWT was 
      discontinued, and the size of the graft and any nonadherent areas were measured 
      and recorded. Concomitant comorbidities, wound location, etiology, study 
      failures, and reoperative rates were also reviewed. In all, 77 and 80 wounds were 
      randomized to the GSUC and VAC study arms. Patient demographics were similar 
      between both groups in terms of age, sex, comorbidities, etiology, and wound 
      location. In all, 64 of 80 wounds in the GSUC group and 60 of 77 wounds in the 
      VAC group had full take of the skin graft by postoperative day 4 or 5 (P = .80). 
      The mean percent take in the GSUC group was 96.12% vs 96.21% in the VAC arm (P = 
      .98). The use of NPWT in securing STSG is a useful method to promote adherence 
      and healing. This study demonstrates that a low-cost, readily accessible system 
      utilizing gauze dressings and wall suction (GSUC) results in comparable skin 
      graft take in comparison to the VAC device.
FAU - Nguyen, Trang Q
AU  - Nguyen TQ
AD  - From the *Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 
      University of Chicago Medicine, Illinois; daggerDepartment of Therapy Services, 
      University of Chicago Medicine, Illinois; and double daggerDivision of Plastic and 
      Reconstructive Surgery, UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, 
      California.
FAU - Franczyk, Mieczyslawa
AU  - Franczyk M
FAU - Lee, Justine C
AU  - Lee JC
FAU - Greives, Matthew R
AU  - Greives MR
FAU - O'Connor, Annemarie
AU  - O'Connor A
FAU - Gottlieb, Lawrence J
AU  - Gottlieb LJ
LA  - eng
PT  - Comparative Study
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Randomized Controlled Trial
PT  - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PL  - England
TA  - J Burn Care Res
JT  - Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn 
      Association
JID - 101262774
SB  - IM
MH  - Adult
MH  - Burns/complications/*surgery
MH  - Debridement/*methods
MH  - Female
MH  - Graft Survival
MH  - Humans
MH  - Male
MH  - Middle Aged
MH  - Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy/*methods
MH  - Occlusive Dressings
MH  - Pain Measurement
MH  - Prospective Studies
MH  - Skin Transplantation/*methods
MH  - Suction/*methods
MH  - Treatment Outcome
MH  - Wound Healing/*physiology
MH  - Young Adult
EDAT- 2014/08/28 06:00
MHDA- 2015/12/15 06:00
CRDT- 2014/08/28 06:00
PHST- 2014/08/28 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2014/08/28 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2015/12/15 06:00 [medline]
AID - 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000089 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - J Burn Care Res. 2015 Mar-Apr;36(2):324-8. doi: 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000089.