| Literature DB >> 35909494 |
Youfen Fan1, Yanyan Pan1, Cui Chen1, Shengyong Cui1, Jiliang Li1, Guoying Jin1, Neng Huang1, Sida Xu1.
Abstract
Background: Hot-crush injuries to the hands can be devastating, and early debridement and coverage with skin autograft remains the golden standard of wound treatment. However, this type of treatment is not feasible or unlikely to succeed due to limited donor sites and wound characteristics of hot-crush injuries on hands. Thus, the composite grafting of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and split-thickness skin graft (STSG) as a novel alternative method has been attempted. In this series, the results are presented to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of the use of one-stage procedure for early reconstruction in hand hot-crush injuries.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35909494 PMCID: PMC9334079 DOI: 10.1155/2022/1569084
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.246
Demographic characteristics and treatment data of patients.
| Items | Patients, |
|---|---|
| Age | |
| Median [min, max], years | 40 [16, 59] |
| Gender | |
| Male | 7 (50.0) |
| Female | 7 (50.0) |
| Underlying disease | |
| None | 11 (78.6) |
| Hypertension | 2 (14.3) |
| Diabetes | 2 (14.3) |
| Etiology | |
| Hot-press | 7 (50.0) |
| Crushed by hot machine | 4 (28.6) |
| Hot melt mould | 2 (14.3) |
| Household electric iron | 1 (7.1) |
| Injury locations | |
| Hand | 12 (85.7) |
| Forearm/wrist | 5 (35.7) |
| Defect size | |
| Median [min, max], cm2 | 36.5 [22, 99] |
| Defect degree | |
| Third degree | 2 (14.3) |
| Third-fourth degree | 5 (35.7) |
| Fourth degree | 2 (14.3) |
| Escharotomy | |
| Median [min, max], hours postadmission | 31 [2.5, 94.5] |
| VSD applied | |
| Yes | 12 (85.7) |
| No | 2 (14.3) |
| Median [min, max], days | 13 [7, 20] |
| Surgery | |
| ADM and STSG | 14 (100) |
| STSG only | 2 (14.3) |
| Flap | 2 (14.3) |
| Median [min, max], times | 3 [1, 7] |
| Length of stay | |
| Median [min, max], days | 24.5 [9, 59] |
Figure 1View of patient 8. Day of admission (a); debridement and one-step composite grafting on day 2 postadmission (b, c); first dressing change postgrafting (d); and follow-up at 6 months (e) and 17 months (f) postoperation.
Figure 2View of patient 6. Before and after escharotomy (a); after debridement and first VSD (b); after debridement and second VSD (c); one-step composite grafting on day 11 postadmission (d); first dressing change postgrafting (e); and follow-up at 1 month (f) and 4 months (g) postoperation.
Figure 3View of patient 7. Granulation wounds after debridement and two times of VSD for 14 days (a); one-step composite grafting on day 16 postadmission (b); first dressing change postgrafting (c); and follow-up at 4 months postoperation (d).
Figure 4View of patient 14. Day of admission (a); granulation wounds after debridement and VSD for 7 days (b); second debridement and one-step composite grafting on day 8 postadmission (c, d); necrosis and infection of composite grafts on days 7 postsurgery (e); and granulation wounds after debridement and third VSD for 7 days (f).
One-stage grafting procedure related data and VSS score at last follow-up.
| Patient | ADM applied | No. of ADMs | ADM placement time, | ADM placement site | Tendon exposed | Composite grafts survival | VSS score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 34 | 1 | 48 | Forearm | Y | Y | 2 |
| 2 | 25 | 1 | 23 | Opisthenar | N | Y | 4 |
| III | Y | Y | 3 | ||||
| IV | N | Y | 3 | ||||
| 3 | 24 | 1 | 22 | Wrist | Y | Y | 3 |
| 4 | 20 | 1 | 11 | III | N | Y | 3 |
| IV | Y | Y | 3 | ||||
| 5 | 72 | 2 | 10 | Forearm | N | Y | 2 |
| Wrist/palm/I | Y | Y | 5 | ||||
| 6 | 33 | 1 | 12 | Thenar | Y | Y | 2 |
| Hypothenar | Y | Y | 2 | ||||
| 7 | 30 | 1 | 17 | Palm, I | N | Y | 2 |
| 8 | 35 | 1 | 2 | Opisthenar | N | Y | 1 |
| 9 | 29 | 1 | 11 | I/II/first web space | N | Liquefaction/necrosis | 3 |
| 10 | 30 | 1 | 2 | Opisthenar | N | Y | 1 |
| 11 | 28 | 1 | 15 | Forearm | Y | Y | 1 |
| 12 | 32 | 1 | 12 | Opisthenar | N | Y | 1 |
| III | Y | Y | 1 | ||||
| 13 | 91 | 3 | 6 | Forearm | Y | Y | 1 |
| Thenar | N | Y | 1 | ||||
| Hypothenar | N | Y | 1 | ||||
| 14 | 20 | 1 | 8 | II | Y | Liquefaction/necrosis | 4 |
| III | Y | Liquefaction/necrosis | 2 |
I: thumb; II: index finger; III: middle finger; IV: ring finger; V: small finger.
TAM grade at last follow-up.
| Patient | Affected fingers | TAM grade (at last follow-up) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | No finger involved | |
| 2 | III/IV | Fair |
| 3 | No finger involved | |
| 4 | III/IV | Good |
| 5 | I | Good |
| 6 | I | Excellent |
| V | Good | |
| 7 | I | Excellent |
| 8 | I/II | Excellent |
| 9 | I/II | Excellent |
| 10 | II/III | Excellent |
| 11 | No finger involved | |
| 12 | II/III/IV | Excellent |
| 13 | I/V | Excellent |
| 14 | II | Good |
| III | Excellent |
I: thumb; II: index finger; III: middle finger; IV: ring finger; V: small finger.
Figure 5View of patient 5. Granulation wounds after debridement and two times of VSD for 10 days (a); one-step composite grafting on day 10 postadmission (b); and follow-up at 1 month (c), 6 months (d, e), and 20 months postoperation (f).