Thin and Ultra-Thin Split-Thickness Skin Grafts Are Safe and Efficacious in the Burn Population

Abstract

Abstract Split-thickness skin-grafts are a mainstay of burn management. Studies suggest no benefit to using thick (0.025 inch) over standard (0.012–0.020 inch) grafts, and some support the use of thin (0.008 inch) over standard thickness. Data on the use of even thinner grafts is scarce. This study reviewed outcomes of burn patients treated with thin (0.008–0.011 inch) and ultra-thin (≤0.007 inch) grafts. Retrospective review of records from July 2012 to June 2016 included patients who sustained operative burns treated by a single surgeon. Patients were excluded for nonoperative injuries, inhalational injuries, or prolonged hospitalizations. Outcome measures were compared between thin and ultra-thin groups. One-hundred twenty-eight patients met inclusion criteria; 35 received thin split-thickness skin-grafts while 93 received ultra-thin. Cohort analysis demonstrated equivalent graft-take, time to reepithelialization, and functional outcomes. Time to donor-site healing was significantly faster in the ultra-thin cohort (P = .04). Of those with functional outcomes recorded, 88.1% had good-excellent function and 11.9% retained a limitation in function as designated in physical therapy notes. There were fewer complications overall (P = .004) and a lower incidence of hypertrophic scarring (P = .025) in the ultra-thin cohort. This study presents a single-surgeon experience with thin and ultra-thin split-thickness skin-grafts. These grafts are exhibit excellent graft-take and few complications. There was no correlation between thickness and functional outcome at the time of physical therapy discharge. Donor-site reepithelialization was faster with ultra-thin grafts, which may be important in patients with large burns and limited donor sites.