These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Use of a home vacuum-assisted closure device in the burn population is both cost-effective and efficacious.
    Author: Mushin OP, Bogue JT, Esquenazi MD, Toscano N, Bell DE.
    Journal: Burns; 2017 May; 43(3):490-494. PubMed ID: 28256293.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: The vacuum assisted closure device (VAC) improves wound-healing when utilized as a bolster to secure split thickness skin grafts (STSG). Patients typically remain hospitalized for VAC therapy; however, home VACs (hVAC) are now available. Limited studies examine burns treated with hVAC as a STSG bolster. METHOD: A retrospective study of records from an ABA verified regional burn center was conducted over 23 months. Patients included STSGs for burn. Data points included demographics, burn mechanism and location, graft characteristics, hospital length of stay (LOS), and time to heal. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Fifty patients were included, with average age of 39 years (range <1-83years). Average burn TBSA was 1.27±1.42 (range 0.05-8.18). Grafted area average was 102.9±128.1cm2. The most commonly treated areas were the leg/foot, thigh, and torso (53%, 16%, and 16%, respectively). Average LOS was 1.1±1.2 days. Mean graft-take was 99.2±2.8% with one patient undergoing repeat STSG. Average post-operative time to heal was 16±6 days. A 5-day inpatient stay with a VAC costs an average of $34,635, compared to $9134 for an hVAC over the same period. CONCLUSIONS: The hVAC is a cost-effective STSG bolster in the burn population for appropriate candidates. Excellent graft-take and low morbidity rates imply that this is an efficacious alternative for STSG bolster.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]