Epidermal grafting versus split-thickness skin grafting for wound healing (EPIGRAAFT): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Muholan Kanapathy, Nadine Hachach-Haram, Nicola Bystrzonowski, Keith Harding, Afshin Mosahebi, Toby Richards, Muholan Kanapathy, Nadine Hachach-Haram, Nicola Bystrzonowski, Keith Harding, Afshin Mosahebi, Toby Richards

Abstract

Background: Split-thickness skin grafting (SSG) is an important modality for wound closure. However, the donor site becomes a second, often painful wound, which may take more time to heal than the graft site itself and holds the risk of infection and scarring. Epidermal grafting (EG) is an alternative method of autologous skin grafting that harvests only the epidermal layer of the skin by applying continuous negative pressure on the normal skin to raise blisters. This procedure has minimal donor site morbidity and is relatively pain-free, allowing autologous skin grafting in an outpatient setting. We plan to compare EG to SSG and to further investigate the cellular mechanism by which each technique achieves wound healing.

Methods/design: EPIGRAAFT is a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial that compares the efficacy and wound-healing mechanism of EG with SSG for wound healing. The primary outcome measures are the proportion of wounds healed in 6 weeks and the donor site healing time. The secondary outcome measures include the mean time for complete wound healing, pain score, patient satisfaction, health care utilisation, cost analysis, and incidence of adverse events.

Discussion: This study is expected to define the efficacy of EG and promote further understanding of the mechanism of wound healing by EG compared to SSG. The results of this study can be used to inform the current best practise for wound care.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT02535481 . Registered on 11 August 2015.

Keywords: CelluTome; Epidermal graft; Split-thickness skin graft; Wound healing.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart illustrating patient’s journey throughout the study

References

    1. Thorne C, Gurtner G, Chung K, Gosain A, Mehrara B, Rubin P, et al. Grabb and Smith’s plastic surgery. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.
    1. Gabriel A, Sobota RV, Champaneria M. Initial experience with a new epidermal harvesting system: overview of epidermal grafting and case series. Surg Technol Int. 2014;25:55–61.
    1. Hachach-Haram N, Bystrzonowski N, Kanapathy M, Smith O, Harding K, Mosahebi A, et al. A prospective, multicentre study on the use of epidermal grafts to optimise outpatient wound management. Int Wound J. 2016. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12595.
    1. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, Dickersin K, Moher D. SPIRIT 2013: new guidance for content of clinical trial protocols. Lancet. 2013;381(9861):91–2. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62160-6.
    1. Hachach-Haram N, Bystrzonowski N, Kanapathy M, Edmondson SJ, Twyman L, Richards T, et al. The use of epidermal grafting for the management of acute wounds in the outpatient setting. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015;68(9):1317–8. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2015.04.019.
    1. Pukstad BS, Ryan L, Flo TH, Stenvik J, Moseley R, Harding K, et al. Non-healing is associated with persistent stimulation of the innate immune response in chronic venous leg ulcers. J Dermatol Sci. 2010;59(2):115–22. doi: 10.1016/j.jdermsci.2010.05.003.
    1. Sutcliffe JE, Chin KY, Thrasivoulou C, Serena TE, O’Neil S, Hu R, et al. Abnormal connexin expression in human chronic wounds. Br J Dermatol. 2015;173(5):1205–15. doi: 10.1111/bjd.14064.
    1. Ud-Din S, Sebastian A, Giddings P, Colthurst J, Whiteside S, Morris J, et al. Angiogenesis is induced and wound size is reduced by electrical stimulation in an acute wound healing model in human skin. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0124502. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124502.
    1. Park KH. A retrospective study using the pressure ulcer scale for healing (PUSH) tool to examine factors affecting stage II pressure ulcer healing in a Korean acute care hospital. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2014;60(9):40–51.
    1. Hansen EL, Clarke A, Austin-Parsons N, Butler PE. The psychological impact of split-thickness skin grafts. J Wound Care. 2012;21(10):490–2. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2012.21.10.490.
    1. Phillips CJ, Humphreys I, Fletcher J, Harding K, Chamberlain G, Macey S. Estimating the costs associated with the management of patients with chronic wounds using linked routine data. Int Wound J. 2015. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12443.
    1. Guest JF, Ayoub N, McIlwraith T, Uchegbu I, Gerrish A, Weidlich D, et al. Health economic burden that wounds impose on the National Health Service in the UK. BMJ Open. 2015;5(12):e009283. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009283.
    1. Richmond NA, Lamel SA, Braun LR, Vivas AC, Serena T, Kirsner RS. Epidermal grafting using a novel suction blister-harvesting system for the treatment of pyoderma gangrenosum. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150(9):999–1000. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2014.1431.
    1. Barrandon Y, Green H. Cell migration is essential for sustained growth of keratinocyte colonies: the roles of transforming growth factor-alpha and epidermal growth factor. Cell. 1987;50(7):1131–7. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(87)90179-6.
    1. Osborne SN, Schmidt MA, Derrick K, Harper JR. Epidermal micrografts produced via an automated and minimally invasive tool form at the dermal/epidermal junction and contain proliferative cells that secrete wound healing growth factors. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2015;28(9):397–405.
    1. Kirfel G, Herzog V. Migration of epidermal keratinocytes: mechanisms, regulation, and biological significance. Protoplasma. 2004;223(2-4):67–78. doi: 10.1007/s00709-003-0031-5.
    1. Becker DL, Thrasivoulou C, Phillips ARJ. Connexins in wound healing; perspectives in diabetic patients. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2012;1818(8):2068–75. doi: 10.1016/j.bbamem.2011.11.017.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi