[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.147.241.171. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
October 1979

A Clinical and Laboratory Evaluation of a Polyurethane FoamA New Donor Site Dressing

Author Affiliations

From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Surgery of the Hand (Drs Bevin and Dingeldein), the Jaycee Burn Center, Burn Research Laboratory (Dr Salisbury), and the Department of Pathology (Dr Grisham), University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC.

Arch Surg. 1979;114(10):1188-1192. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1979.01370340094016
Abstract

• A polyurethane foam (Lyofoam) has been reported to accelerate epithelization of a wound. The purpose of this study was to evaluate its efficacy as a donor-site dressing for thermally injured patients. Thus, partial-thickness injuries were made in ten pigs and covered with Lyofoam, Xeroform, Telfa, Scarlet Red, and fine-mesh gauze. Gross and histologic examinations failed to show accelerated healing under the Lyofoam dressing but did show that Scarlet Red covered donor sites healed the fastest. On clinical evaluation, nine patients only showed that Lyofoam separated earlier from the underlying wound but there was no evidence to suggest that the wound was more mature than that covered with fine-mesh gauze.

(Arch Surg 114:1188-1192, 1979)

References
1.
Anderson R, Dykes ER:  Management of the donor site . Cleve Clin Q 26:106-112, 1959.Article
2.
Artz CP, Bronwell AW, Sako Y:  The exposure treatment of donor sites . Am J Surg 142:248-251, 1955.
3.
Bailey BN, Duck D:  The healing of split-skin donor sites . Br J Plast Surg 11:318-321, 1958.Article
4.
Bellinger CG, Conway H:  Effects of silver nitrate and sulfamylon on epithelial regeneration . J Plast Reconstr Surg 45:582-585, 1970.Article
5.
Davenport PJ, Dhooghe PL, Yiorowmettis S:  A prospective comparison of two split-skin graft donor site dressings . Burns 3:225-228, 1976/77.Article
6.
Elliot RA, Hoehn JG:  Use of commercial porcine skin for wound dressings . J Plast Reconstr Surg 52:401-405, 1973.Article
7.
Gemberling RM, Miller TA, Caffee H, et al:  Dressing comparison in the healing of donor sites . J Trauma 16:812-814, 1976.Article
8.
Gillman T, Penn J, Bronks D, et al:  Reactions of healing wounds and granulation tissue in man to auto-Thiersch, autodermal, and homodermal grafts . Br J Plast Surg 6:153-223, 1953.Article
9.
Graham WP:  Allografting split-thickness skin donor sites . Surgery 66:460, 1969.
10.
Hinman CD, Maibach H:  Effect of air exposure and occlusion on experimental human skin wounds . Nature 200:377-379, 1963.Article
11.
James JH, Watson AC:  The use of Opsite, a vapour-permeable dressing, on skin graft donor sites . Br J Plast Surg 28:107-110, 1975.
12.
Lloyd JR:  Improved management of skin graft donor sites . Arch Surg 108:561-565, 1974.Article
13.
Salisbury RE, Wilmore DW, Silverstein P, et al:  Biological dressings for skin graft donor sites . Arch Surg 106:705-706, 1973.Article
14.
Winter GD:  Epidermal wound healing under a new polyurethane foam dressing . J Plast Reconstr Surg 56:531-537, 1975.Article
15.
Salomon JC, Diegelmann RF, Cohen IK:  Effect of dressing on donor site epithelialization . Surg Forum 25:516, 1975.
16.
Townsend PL:  The quest for a cheap and painless donor-site dressing . Burns 2:82-85, 1976.Article
×