Open Access
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Plast Surg 2018; 51(01): 046-053
DOI: 10.4103/ijps.IJPS_217_17
Original Article
Association of Plastic Surgeons of India

Versatile use of dermal substitutes: A retrospective survey of 127 consecutive cases

Giovanni Nicoletti
1   Department of Clinical Surgical Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, University of Pavia, Italy
2   Advanced Technologies for Regenerative Medicine and Inductive Surgery Research Center, University of Pavia, Italy
,
Marco Mario Tresoldi
1   Department of Clinical Surgical Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, University of Pavia, Italy
2   Advanced Technologies for Regenerative Medicine and Inductive Surgery Research Center, University of Pavia, Italy
,
Alberto Malovini
3   Laboratory of Informatics and Systems Engineering for Clinical Research, Maugeri Clinical Scientific Institutes, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
,
Marco Visaggio
1   Department of Clinical Surgical Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, University of Pavia, Italy
,
Angela Faga
4   Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Maugeri Clinical Scientific Institutes, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
5   Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
,
Silvia Scevola
2   Advanced Technologies for Regenerative Medicine and Inductive Surgery Research Center, University of Pavia, Italy
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
26 July 2019 (online)

Preview

ABSTRACT

Background: Dermal substitutes are currently largely used for the treatment of huge skin loss in patients in critical general health conditions, for the treatment of severe burns and to promote the healing process in chronic wounds. Aims: The authors performed a retrospective assessment of their experience with bioengineered skin to possibly identify the most appropriate clinical indication and management for each substitute. Materials and Methods: The study involved 109 patients with 127 skin defects repaired with dermal substitutes over a 9 years period, from 2007 to 2016. Hyalomatrix® was used in 63 defects, whereas Integra® and Nevelia® were used in 56 and 8 defects, respectively. Results: The statistical analysis failed to reveal a correlation between the choice of a specific dermal substitute and any possible clinical variable except in the soft-tissue defects of the scalp where Hyalomatrix® was electively used. Conclusions: In the authors’ experience, the scalp defects followed a radical excision of skin tumours that included the periosteum. Here, the preliminary cover with a hyaluronan three-dimensional scaffold constantly allowed for the regeneration of a derma-like layer with a rich vascular network fit for supporting a split-thickness skin graft. Nevertheless, the authors still prefer Integra® when the goal is a better cosmetic outcome and Hyalomatrix® when a faster wound healing is required, especially in the management of deep wounds where the priority is a fast obliteration with a newly formed tissue with a rich blood supply. However, these clinical indications still are anecdotally based.