Using Modified Skin-Stretching Technique as an Alternative Solution for the Closure of Moderate and Extensive Skin Defects

Platelet-rich gel versus external tissue expansion technique in treating scalp defects: A retrospective study

Reconstruction of scalp defects is a complicated and challenging procedure for reconstructive surgeons. This retrospective observational study assessed the effectiveness of using platelet-rich gel (PRG) versus the external tissue expansion technique (TET) in reconstructing scalp defects. The clinical data of 24 patients with scalp defects treated with PRG or external TET were collected from September 2018 to March 2022. Data on the wound characteristics, wound healing time, cost of treatment, visual analog scale, and observed wound healing status were collected. The mean wound healing times in the PRG and TET groups were 25.00 ± 5.77 and 13.58 ± 9.68 days, respectively (P < .05). The PRG group was significantly more cost-effective than the TET group (P < .05). TET treatment significantly increased patients' postoperative pain, which decreased over time (P < .05), while PRG treatment caused no significant change in pain (P > .05). The 2 groups showed no tissue depression or color change after wound healing at follow-up, but the hair growth in the TET group was significantly better than that in the PRG group (P < .05). Compared with TET treatment of scalp defects, PRG is not only simple and painless but also has a low treatment cost and, more importantly, does not involve the risk of surgery and anesthesia. However, using TET to treat scalp defects requires the careful selection of appropriate cases.

Efficacy and safety of external tissue expansion technique in the treatment of soft tissue defects: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes and complication rates

Background

Currently, various external tissue expansion devices are becoming widely used. Considering the scarcity of relevant application standards, this systematic review was performed to explore the effectiveness and safety of external tissue expansion techniques for the reconstruction of soft tissue defects.

Method

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of external tissue expansion technique was conducted. A comprehensive search was performed in the following electronic databases: PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library (Wiley Online Library), and Web of Science. Studies reporting patients with soft tissue defects under the treatment of external tissue expansion technique were included.

Results

A total of 66 studies with 22 different types of external tissue expansion devices met the inclusion criteria. We performed a descriptive analysis of different kinds of devices. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the external tissue expansion technique for different aetiologies. The pooled mean wound healing time among patients with defects after fasciotomy was 10.548 days [95% confidence interval (CI) = 5.796-15.299]. The pooled median wound healing times of patients with defects after excisional surgery, trauma, chronic ulcers and abdominal defects were 11.218 days (95% CI = 6.183-16.253), 11.561 days (95% CI = 7.062-16.060), 15.956 days (95% CI = 11.916-19.996) and 12.853 days (95% CI=9.444-16.227), respectively. The pooled wound healing rates of patients with defects after fasciotomy, excisional surgery, trauma, chronic ulcers and abdominal defects were 93.8% (95% CI=87.1-98.2%), 97.2% (95%CI=92.2-99.7%), 97.0% (95%CI=91.2-99.8%), 99.5% (95%CI=97.6-100%), and 96.8% (95%CI=79.2-100%), respectively. We performed a subgroup analysis in patients with diabetic ulcers and open abdominal wounds. The pooled median wound healing time of patients with diabetic ulcers was 11.730 days (95% CI = 10.334-13.125). The pooled median wound healing time of patients with open abdomen defects was 48.810 days (95% CI = 35.557-62.063) and the pooled successful healing rate was 68.8% (95% CI = 45.9-88.1%). A total of 1686 patients were included, 265 (15.7%) of whom experienced complications. The most common complication was dehiscence (n = 53, 3.14%).

Conclusions

Our systematic review is the first to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of external tissue expansion in the management of soft tissue defects. However, we must interpret the meta-analysis results with caution considering the limitations of this review. Large-scale randomized controlled trials and long-term follow-up studies are still needed to confirm the effectiveness and evaluate the quality of healing.