Download PDF
J Hand Microsurg 2023; 15(05): 340-350
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1749077
Original Article

Upper Extremity Wounds Treated with Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix versus Collagen-Chondroitin Silicone Bilayer

Shannon S. Wu 
1   Department of Education, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
,
Michael Wells
2   Department of Education, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
,
Mona Ascha
3   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, United States
,
James Gatherwright
4   Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Akron General, Akron, Ohio, United States
,
Kyle J. Chepla
5   Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
› Author Affiliations Funding This study was funded internally. There are no other funding sources to disclose, including NIH, Wellcome Trust, HHMI, or others. The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective This study aims to compare outcomes between Novosorb Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix (BTM) and Integra collagen-chondroitin silicone for upper-extremity wound reconstruction.

Methods This retrospective study analyzed adult patients who underwent wound reconstruction with either BTM or Integra at our institution between 2015 and 2020.

Results Forty-eight patients were included: 31 (64.6%) BTM and 17 (35.4%) Integra. Mean age was 44.0 (range: 18–68) years. Age, race, sex, smoking, comorbidities, and defect size were similar between groups. Wound etiologies included 12 (25.0%) burn, 22 (45.8%) trauma, and others. Median template size was 133 cm2 for BTM and 104 cm2 for Integra (p = 0.526). Skin grafting was performed after 14 (45.2%) and 14 (82.4%) wounds treated with BTM and Integra, respectively (p = 0.028). Template complications of infection and dehiscence were comparable. Skin-graft complications occurred in five (35.7%) and three (21.4%) wounds in BTM and Integra, respectively (p = 0.031). Skin-graft failure rates were comparable (p = 0.121). Mean number of secondary procedures required after template placement was higher in the Integra group (BTM, 1.0; Integra, 1.9; p = 0.090). Final healing was achieved in 17 (54.8%) BTM and 11 (64.7%) Integra wounds (p = 0.694). Median time to healing was 4.1 months after BTM and 2.6 months after Integra placement (p = 0.014).

Conclusion Compared with Integra, BTM achieved comparable wound healing and complication rates. Fewer secondary procedures and skin grafts were observed in BTM wounds, likely as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. At our institution, 100 cm2 of product costs $850 for BTM and $3,150 for Integra, suggesting BTM as an economical alternative to fulfill the high functional and aesthetic requirements of upper-extremity wounds.

Keywords

Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix - dermal substitute - Integra - Novosorb - wound healing

Ethical Approval

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008 (5). For a retrospective study, formal consent is not required.


Authors' Contribution

M.A., K.C., and J.G. were responsible for conception and design; K.C. and J.G. were responsible for administrative support; K.C. and J.G. were responsible for the provision of study materials or patients; S.W. and M.W. were responsible for collection and assembly of data; S.W. and M.A. were responsible for data analysis and interpretation; all authors were responsible for manuscript writing; and all authors were responsible for final approval of manuscript.


Abbreviations

BMI, Body mass index


BTM, Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix


CCS, Collagen-chondroitin silicone


EMR, Electronic medical record


FDA, Food and Drug Administration


IQR, Interquartile range


SD, Standard deviation


STSG, Split-thickness skin graft


Statement of Human and Animal Rights

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008 (5).


Statement of Informed Consent

No informed consent was required for this study. Informed consent was waived for all patients and no identifying patient information is in this article.




Publication History

Article published online:
01 June 2022

© 2022. Society of Indian Hand Surgery & Microsurgeons. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Levin LS. The reconstructive ladder. An orthoplastic approach. Orthop Clin North Am 1993; 24 (03) 393-409
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Brusselaers N, Pirayesh A, Hoeksema H. et al. Skin replacement in burn wounds. J Trauma 2010; 68 (02) 490-501
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Nandi S, Maschke S, Evans PJ, Lawton JN. The stiff elbow. Hand (N Y) 2009; 4 (04) 368-379
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Chou TD, Chen SL, Lee TW. et al. Reconstruction of burn scar of the upper extremities with artificial skin. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 108 (02) 378-384 , discussion 385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ryan CM, Schoenfeld DA, Malloy M, Schulz III JT, Sheridan RL, Tompkins RG. Use of Integra artificial skin is associated with decreased length of stay for severely injured adult burn survivors. J Burn Care Rehabil 2002; 23 (05) 311-317
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Heimbach DM, Warden GD, Luterman A. et al. Multicenter postapproval clinical trial of Integra dermal regeneration template for burn treatment. J Burn Care Rehabil 2003; 24 (01) 42-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Heimbach D, Luterman A, Burke J. et al. Artificial dermis for major burns. A multi-center randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 1988; 208 (03) 313-320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Burke JF, Yannas IV, Quinby Jr WC, Bondoc CC, Jung WK. Successful use of a physiologically acceptable artificial skin in the treatment of extensive burn injury. Ann Surg 1981; 194 (04) 413-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kogan S, Halsey J, Agag RL. Biologics in acute burn injury. Ann Plast Surg 2019; 83 (01) 26-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Wagstaff MJD, Schmitt BJ, Caplash Y, Greenwood JE. Free flap donor site reconstruction: a prospective case series using an optimized polyurethane biodegradable temporizing matrix. Eplasty 2015; 15: e27-e27
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Li A, Dearman BL, Crompton KE, Moore TG, Greenwood JE. Evaluation of a novel biodegradable polymer for the generation of a dermal matrix. J Burn Care Res 2009; 30 (04) 717-728
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Greenwood JE. The evolution of acute burn care—retiring the split skin graft. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2017; 99 (06) 432-438
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Tatai L, Moore TG, Adhikari R. et al. Thermoplastic biodegradable polyurethanes: the effect of chain extender structure on properties and in-vitro degradation. Biomaterials 2007; 28 (36) 5407-5417
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Damkat-Thomas L, Greenwood JE, Wagstaff MJD. A synthetic Biodegradable Temporising Matrix in degloving lower extremity trauma reconstruction: a case report. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2019; 7 (04) e2110-e2110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Greenwood JE, Schmitt BJ, Wagstaff MJD. Experience with a synthetic bilayer Biodegradable Temporising Matrix in significant burn injury. Burn Open 2018; 2 (01) 17-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Wagstaff MJD, Salna IM, Caplash Y, Greenwood JE. Biodegradable Temporising Matrix (BTM) for the reconstruction of defects following serial debridement for necrotising fasciitis: a case series. Burn Open 2019; 3 (01) 12-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Food and Drug Administration 510(k) S. Published 2015. Accessed January 28, 2021 at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf14/K142879.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Jeng JC, Fidler PE, Sokolich JC. et al. Seven years' experience with Integra as a reconstructive tool. J Burn Care Res 2007; 28 (01) 120-126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Nguyen DQA, Potokar TS, Price P. An objective long-term evaluation of Integra (a dermal skin substitute) and split thickness skin grafts, in acute burns and reconstructive surgery. Burns 2010; 36 (01) 23-28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Graham GP, Helmer SD, Haan JM, Khandelwal A. The use of Integra® Dermal Regeneration Template in the reconstruction of traumatic degloving injuries. J Burn Care Res 2013; 34 (02) 261-266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Moiemen N, Yarrow J, Hodgson E. et al. Long-term clinical and histological analysis of Integra dermal regeneration template. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127 (03) 1149-1154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Son JH, Bafus B, Khandelwal A, Chepla KJ. Reconstruction of a circumferential upper extremity soft tissue defect with a dermal regeneration template and skin grafting. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg 2018; 22 (01) 31-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Weigert R, Choughri H, Casoli V. Management of severe hand wounds with Integra® Dermal Regeneration Template. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2011; 36 (03) 185-193
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Lucas D, Di Rocco D, Müller CT. et al. Application of dermal skin substitutes for hand and finger palmar soft tissue loss. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2019; 7 (11) e2551
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Azzena B, Amabile A, Tiengo C. Use of acellular dermal regeneration template in a complete finger degloving injury: case report. J Hand Surg Am 2010; 35 (12) 2057-2060
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Katrana F, Kostopoulos E, Delia G, Lunel GG, Casoli V. Reanimation of thumb extension after upper extremity degloving injury treated with Integra. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2008; 33 (06) 800-802
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Herlin C, Louhaem D, Bigorre M, Dimeglio A, Captier G. Use of Integra in a paediatric upper extremity degloving injury. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2007; 32 (02) 179-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Wolter TP, Noah EM, Pallua N. The use of Integra in an upper extremity avulsion injury. Br J Plast Surg 2005; 58 (03) 416-418
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Lagus H, Sarlomo-Rikala M, Böhling T, Vuola J. Prospective study on burns treated with Integra®, a cellulose sponge and split thickness skin graft: comparative clinical and histological study—randomized controlled trial. Burns 2013; 39 (08) 1577-1587
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Driver VR, Lavery LA, Reyzelman AM. et al. A clinical trial of Integra Template for diabetic foot ulcer treatment. Wound Repair Regen 2015; 23 (06) 891-900
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Branski LK, Herndon DN, Pereira C. et al. Longitudinal assessment of Integra in primary burn management: a randomized pediatric clinical trial. Crit Care Med 2007; 35 (11) 2615-2623
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Gonzalez SR, Wolter KG, Yuen JC. Infectious complications associated with the use of integra: a systematic review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2020; 8 (07) e2869-e2869
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Cheshire PA, Herson MR, Cleland H, Akbarzadeh S. Artificial dermal templates: a comparative study of NovoSorb™ Biodegradable Temporising Matrix (BTM) and Integra(®) Dermal Regeneration Template (DRT). Burns 2016; 42 (05) 1088-1096
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Greenwood JE, Wagstaff MJD, Rooke M, Caplash Y. Reconstruction of extensive calvarial exposure after major burn injury in 2 stages using a biodegradable polyurethane matrix. Eplasty 2016; 16: e17
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Wagstaff MJ, Caplash Y, Greenwood JE. Reconstruction of an anterior cervical necrotizing fasciitis defect using a biodegradable polyurethane dermal substitute. Eplasty 2017; 17: e3-e3
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Telianidis S, Reilly D, Holden D, Cleland H. Case report: the use of biodegradable temporising matrix in breast reconstruction following flame burn to chest. Burn Open 2020; 4 (03) 117-120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Solanki NS, York B, Gao Y, Baker P, Wong She RB. A consecutive case series of defects reconstructed using NovoSorb Ⓡ Biodegradable Temporising Matrix: Initial experience and early results. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2020; 73 (10) 1845-1853
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Hollier Jr LHJ, Tanna N, Kasabian AK. et al. The COVID-19 pandemic: crisis management for plastic surgeons. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020; 146 (05) 1197-1206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Dorfman R, Saadat S, Gupta N, Roostaeian J, Da Lio A. The COVID-19 pandemic and plastic surgery: literature review, ethical analysis, and proposed guidelines. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020; 146 (04) 482e-493e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Ozturk CN, Kuruoglu D, Ozturk C, Rampazzo A, Gurunian Gurunluoglu R. Plastic surgery and the COVID-19 pandemic: a review of clinical guidelines. Ann Plast Surg 2020; 85 2S (Suppl. 02) S155-S160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar