Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT03340025
NCT03340025CompletedNot Applicable

Single-Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for Free Flap Donor Sites

University of Alabama at Birmingham1 site in 1 country20 target enrollmentStarted: June 15, 2018Last updated:
Conditions
Interventions

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Not Applicable
Status
Completed
Enrollment
20
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Progression of Wound Healing

Study Overview

Brief Summary

Various management options for free flap donor sites that require split thickness skin grafting exist. None has proven superior from both a patient care and a cost standpoint. Major complications occurring at these surgical sites include wound breakdown, tendon exposure, and loss of function. We seek to investigate the use of the PICO single-use negative pressure wound therapy device in these surgical sites and determine if it can yield superior results to simpler methods.

Detailed Description

Many studies have addressed the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in free flap donor sites with mixed results. It is well established that NPWT is safe and causes no harm, and no delay in healing. A previous study performed at UAB showed that NPWT in complex Head & Neck Surgery reconstruction is safe, including free flap donor sites. There have been studies that state the rate of tendon exposure is lower with NPWT in free flap donor sites, and studies that conclude there is no difference in complication rates. Current clinical practice is varied, often within a single institution.

While no studies of NPWT in free flap donor sites have noted inferior results with its use, a primary reason cited for not using it is cost. Traditional NPWT using canister-based vacuum devices adds significant cost. The PICO single-use NPWT device (Smith & Nephew) is a relatively inexpensive, low-profile dressing that does not require attachment to an external canister. It is battery-powered and disposable. Empiric use on our patients undergoing split-thickness skin-grafting to free flap donor sites shows good results with minimal intra-operative effort compared to traditional bandaging. We would like to prospectively investigate the use of this low-cost NPWT device and compare it directly to the traditional post-op dressing method.

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Masking
Single (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No

Inclusion Criteria

  • •> 18 years of age
  • •participants are able to consent for themselves
  • •undergoing reconstructive surgery requiring split-thickness skin graft coverage of a free flap donor site (i.e., radial forearm free flap or fibula free flap)

Exclusion Criteria

  • •< 18 years of age
  • •participants are unable to consent for themselves
  • •undergoing reconstructive surgery that does not require split-thickness skin graft coverage of a free flap donor site

Arms & Interventions

conventional dressing

Placebo Comparator

traditional surgical wound dressing of xeroform gauze and padding

Intervention: xeroform gauze (Device)

negative pressure wound therapy

Experimental

PICO Single Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy System

Intervention: PICO Single Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy System (Device)

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Progression of Wound Healing

Time Frame: Baseline through 30 days

Comparison of photographs of all participants' wounds taken at post-operative Day 5, post-operative Day 14-21, and post-operative Day 30. Percentage skin graft take will be evaluated on Day 30 by blinded, independent raters. A 10x10 grid was digitally overlain on each image. The de-identified images were randomized and given to two independent raters. The raters used three criteria to assess each graft. Overall graft appearance was graded on a 1-5 scale, percent of graft take was estimated, and the presence of exposed tendon was noted for each timepoint.

Secondary Outcomes

No secondary outcomes reported

Investigators

Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Benjamin Greene

Principal Investigator

University of Alabama at Birmingham

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials