• Burns · Sep 2019

    Superior long term functional and scar outcome of Meek micrografting compared to conventional split thickness skin grafting in the management of burns.

    • Shi Zhen Lee and Ahmad Sukari Halim.
    • Reconstructive Sciences Unit, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 16150 Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia; Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, 16150 Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia. Electronic address: michael_lsz_1985@yahoo.com.
    • Burns. 2019 Sep 1; 45 (6): 1386-1400.

    IntroductionAutologous skin grafting is the mainstay of treatment in burn patients. Extensive full thickness burns remains a challenge to the burns surgeon due to the lack of autologous skin donor sites. The conventional split thickness skin grafting (SSG) and the Meek micrografting (Meek) technique are part of the armamentarium of the burns surgeon to curtail the challenge of paucity of donor sites. With advances in burn care, mortality rates of burn patients have reduced. As a result, with more patients surviving acute burn, there is a paradigm shift of research towards assessment of functional outcomes and quality of life of the burn survivors. As there is lack of research regarding the functional outcome of the Meek technique, this study was designed to examine the long term functional outcome of the Meek technique and SSG in burns.MethodA cross-sectional study was conducted in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia to assess patients with burns between 10 to 40% total body surface area (TBSA) and with at least one year after injury. The Burn Specific Health Score-brief (BSHS-B) was utilized to compare the functional outcome whilst the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was used for comparison on the scar outcome of the two skin grafting techniques.ResultsForty three patients (Meek,15; SSG,28) were included. The mean current age (years old) of Meek and SSG was 24.7 (range, 7-75) and 25.9 (range, 7-65) respectively. The mean TBSA (%) of the Meek group was 26.7 (range, 13-40) while that of the SSG group was 16.1 (range, 10-32). A simplified domain structure was used for the BSHS-B questionnaire. The work and sexuality subscale were analyzed separately due to missing data. There mean scores of affect and relations was higher in Meek compared to SSG (Meek, 3.86; SSG, 3.75; p > 0.05). Function domain was also better in Meek compared to SSG (Meek, 3.88; SSG, 3.73; p > 0.05). The Meek group displayed superior scar outcome compared to SSG as evidenced by the statistically significant difference in score for the pigmentation, pliability, height and total VSS score.ConclusionThe Meek group showed more favorable BSHS-B scores compared to the SSG group. The scar outcome of the Meek technique is significantly superior to SSG. Therefore, the Meek technique is superior in the management of burns because the long term scar and functional outcome of this technique is better compared to conventional SSG.Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…