Urinary Bladder Matrix Grafting Versus Flap Coverage for Acute or Infected Wound Defects in Patients With Orthopaedic Trauma

Urinary bladder matrix versus dermal regeneration template for lower extremity wound coverage

PURPOSE

To compare dermal regenerative template (DRT), with and without split-thickness skin-grafting (STSG), and urinary bladder matrix (UBM) for coverage of lower extremity wounds.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 56 lower extremity wounds treated with either DRT and STSG (DRT-S) (n = 18), DRT only (n = 17), or UBM only (n = 21). Patient characteristics, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification, injury characteristics, wound characteristics, use of negative pressure wound therapy, surgical details, postoperative care, and failure of primary wound coverage procedure were documented.

RESULTS

The DRT group, compared to the DRT-S group, was older [median difference (MD) 17.4 years, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.1-25.7; p = 0.0008], more diabetic (proportional difference (PD) 54.2%, CI 21.2-76.1%; p = 0.002), had smaller wounds (MD - 91.0 cm2, CI - 125.0 to - 38.0; p = 0.0008), more infected wounds (PD 49.0%, CI 16.1-71.7%; p = 0.009), a shorter length of stay after coverage (MD - 5.0 days, CI - 29.0 to - 1.0; p = 0.005), and no difference in primary wound coverage failure (41.2% vs. 55.6%; p = 0.50). The UBM group, compared to the DRT group, was younger (MD - 6.8 years; CI - 13.5 to - 0.1; p = 0.04), had fewer patients with an ASA > 2 (PD - 35.0%, CI - 55.2% to - 7.0%; p = 0.02), diabetes (PD - 49.2%, CI - 72.4% to - 17.6%; p = 0.003), and had no difference in primary wound coverage failure (36.4% vs. 41.2%; p = 1.0). Failure of primary wound coverage was found to only be associated with larger wound surface areas (MD 22.0 cm2, CI 4.0-90.0; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

DRT and UBM coverage had similar rates of primary wound coverage failure for lower extremity wounds.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic, Level III.

Evaluating the efficacy of combined flap coverage, antibiotic-loaded bone cement and negative pressure irrigation in traumatic osteomyelitis management

Traumatic osteomyelitis with accompanying soft tissue defects presents a significant therapeutic challenge. This prospective, randomised controlled trial aims to evaluate the efficacy of antibiotic-impregnated bone cement, flap coverage and negative pressure sealed irrigation in the management of traumatic osteomyelitis complicated by soft tissue defects. A total of 46 patients with clinically diagnosed traumatic osteomyelitis and soft tissue defects were randomised into a control group (n = 23) and an observation group (n = 23). The control group underwent standard flap coverage and negative-pressure lavage, while the observation group received an additional treatment with antibiotic-loaded bone cement. Efficacy was measured based on clinical criteria, surgical metrics and morphometric assessment of bone and soft tissue defects. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 27.0. The observation group, treated with an integrated approach of flap coverage, negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and antibiotic-impregnated bone cement, demonstrated significantly higher overall treatment efficacy (91.3%) compared to the control group, which received only flap coverage and NPWT (65.2%) (p < 0.01). This enhanced efficacy was evidenced through various outcomes: the observation group experienced reduced surgical times, shorter hospital stays, fewer dressing changes and accelerated wound healing, all statistically significant (p < 0.001). Additionally, a quantitative analysis at 6-month post-treatment revealed that the observation group showed more substantial reductions in both bone and soft tissue defect sizes compared to the control group (p < 0.001). The multi-modal treatment strategy, combining skin flap coverage, antibiotic bone cement and negative-pressure irrigation, showed marked efficacy in treating traumatic osteomyelitis and associated soft tissue defects. This approach accelerated postoperative recovery and lowered costs.

Surgical Reconstruction of Stage 3 and 4 Pressure Injuries: A Literature Review and Proposed Algorithm from an Interprofessional Working Group

OBJECTIVE

Stage 3 and 4 pressure injuries (PIs) present an enormous societal burden with no clearly defined interventions for surgical reconstruction. The authors sought to assess, via literature review and a reflection/evaluation of their own clinical practice experience (where applicable), the current limitations to the surgical intervention of stage 3 or 4 PIs and propose an algorithm for surgical reconstruction.

METHODS

An interprofessional working group convened to review and assess the scientific literature and propose an algorithm for clinical practice. Data compiled from the literature and a comparison of institutional management were used to develop an algorithm for the surgical reconstruction of stage 3 and 4 PIs with adjunctive use of negative-pressure wound therapy and bioscaffolds.

RESULTS

Surgical reconstruction of PI has relatively high complication rates. The use of negative-pressure wound therapy as adjunctive therapy is beneficial and widespread, leading to reduced dressing change frequency. The evidence for the use of bioscaffolds both in standard wound care and as an adjunct to surgical reconstruction of PI is limited. The proposed algorithm aims to reduce complications typically seen with this patient cohort and improve patient outcomes from surgical intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The working group has proposed a surgical algorithm for stage 3 and 4 PI reconstruction. The algorithm will be validated and refined through additional clinical research.