Full‐thickness skin columns: A method to reduce healing time and donor site morbidity in deep partial‐thickness burns

Abstract

AbstractThe current standard of care for the coverage of large wounds often involves split thickness skin grafts (STSGs) which have numerous limitations. One promising technique that has gained traction is fractional autologous skin grafting using full‐thickness skin columns (FTSC). Harvesting occurs orthogonally by taking numerous individual skin columns containing the epidermis down through the dermis and transferring them to the wound bed. The purpose of this porcine study was to investigate the efficacy of implanting FTSCs directly into deep partial‐thickness burn wounds, as well as examining donor site healing at the maximal harvest density. It was hypothesised that by utilising FTSCs, the rate of healing in deep partial thickness burns can be improved without incurring the donor morbidity seen in other methods of skin grafting. Deep partial‐thickness burns were created on the dorsum of female red duroc swine, debrided 3 days later and FTSCs were implanted at varying expansion ratios directly into the burn wounds. At day 14, 1:50 expansion ratio showed significantly faster re‐epithelialisation compared to the debrided burn control and 1:200. Donor sites (at 7%–10% harvest density) were 100% re‐epithelialised by day 7. Additionally, the maximal harvest density was determined to be 28% in an ex vivo model, which then five donor sites were harvested at 28% density on a red duroc swine and compared to five STSG donor sites. At maximal harvest density, FTSC donor sites were significantly less hypopigmented compared to STSGs, but no significant differences were observed in re‐epithelialisation, contraction, blood flow or dermal thickness. In conclusion, implantation directly into deep partial‐thickness burns is a viable option for the application of FTSCs, favouring lower expansion ratios like 1:50 or lower. Little difference in donor site morbidity was observed between FTSC at a maximal harvest density of 28% and STSGs, exceeding the optimal harvest density.