<< Back to the abstract archive
Efficacy of Dermal Templates in Lower Extremity Wounds: A Retrospective Comparison of Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix versus Collagen-Chondroitin Silicone
Michael Wells, Shannon Wu, Mona Ascha, James Gatherwright, Kyle Chepla
Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine
2021-02-15
Presenter: Michael Wells
Affidavit:
I certify that the material proposed for presentation in this abstract has not been published in any scientific journal or previously presented at a major meeting. The program director is responsible for making a statement within the confines of the box below specific to how much of the work on this project represents the original work of the resident. All authors/submitters of each abstract should discuss this with their respective program director for accurate submission of information as well as the program director's approval for inclusion of his/her electronic signature.
Director Name: James Gatherwright
Author Category: Medical Student
Presentation Category: Clinical
Abstract Category: General Reconstruction
Introduction
Skin substitutes in the treatment of lower extremity wounds have the potential to promote tissue vascularity and thickness of wound bed, enabling better outcomes for skin grafts. Although the standard selection has been IntegraŽ collagen-chondroitin silicone bilayer (CCS), recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of a cheaper alternative in NovosorbTM Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix (BTM).
Methods
A retrospective chart review was performed of patients who underwent reconstruction with application of skin substitute for lower extremity wounds at MetroHealth between 1/1/2015 to 12/31/2020. Patients who expired during the study, were under 18 years old, or had application of cadaveric skin substitutes were excluded. Data regarding patient demographics, wound characteristics, treatment characteristics, and surgical outcomes were collected. Statistical analysis was performed with Chi-squared analysis, t-tests, and analysis of variance using R statistical software.
Results
Eleven patients underwent LE reconstruction with BTM, and 13 patients underwent reconstruction with CCS. There was a statistically significant difference (p< 0.05) between the BTM and CCS patients for age at surgery and specialty of surgeon (p=0.024 and p=0.038, respectively). No other treatment characteristics or outcomes were statistically significantly different.
Conclusion
Despite significant price difference per 100 cm2 between the two dermal substitutes (BTM: $800, CCS: $20,325), there were no statistically significant differences in patient outcomes for lower extremity wound care with CCS compared to BTM. Practitioners may economically benefit from utilizing BTM, although further studies are necessary to prove this.
