title: Evaluation of Six Split-thickness Skin Graft Donor-site Dressing Materials in a Swine Model.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Numerous dressings for split-thickness skin graft donor sites are commercially available with no conclusive evidence-based consensus regarding the optimal dressing choice. This study was conducted to identify which of 5 commonly used materials promotes wound healing most effectively for use on split-thickness donor sites in comparison with our standard dressing, Xeroform (petrolatum gauze).
  
  
  METHODS
  Twenty-four partial-thickness wounds were created on the backs of 4 pigs using a dermatome. Wounds (n = 4 per dressing type per pig) were treated with Xeroform, Opsite (polyurethane film), Kaltostat ( calcium sodium alginate), DuoDERM (hydrocolloid), Aquacel (hydrofiber), and Mepilex (silicone foam). Full-thickness skin samples were excised at 3 or 5 days and evaluated histologically for reepithelialization and inflammation. Comparisons also included incidence of infection, ease of use, and cost analyses.
  
  
  RESULTS
  DuoDERM elicited the greatest percent reepithelialization (81%) and Mepilex the lowest (33%) after 3 days (P = 0.004). All dressings demonstrated complete reepithelialization except Mepilex (85%) at 5 days. There were no infections and inflammation was mild among all treatments. Mepilex was easiest to use, whereas Aquacel, Kaltostat, and Opsite were most difficult (P = 0.03). Xeroform was most cost-effective and Aquacel most expensive. Combined scoring revealed DuoDERM = Xeroform > Opsite = Mepilex > Kaltostat > Aquacel.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  DuoDERM and Xeroform were most effective overall. DuoDERM tended to outperform all dressings in reepithelialization at 3 days, while Xeroform was least expensive, easy to use, and demonstrated rapid reepithelialization. These findings suggest that Xeroform may be preferred for use on large donor-site areas. DuoDERM may be more appropriate for small donor sites when healing time is a priority.
authors.affiliation: Department of General Surgery, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii; and Department of Clinical Investigation, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii.
authors.forename: Pamela C
authors.initials: PC
authors.lastname: Masella
authors.affiliation: Department of General Surgery, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii; and Department of Clinical Investigation, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii.
authors.forename: Eric M
authors.initials: EM
authors.lastname: Balent
authors.affiliation: Department of General Surgery, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii; and Department of Clinical Investigation, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii.
authors.forename: Terri L
authors.initials: TL
authors.lastname: Carlson
authors.affiliation: Department of General Surgery, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii; and Department of Clinical Investigation, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii.
authors.forename: Karen W
authors.initials: KW
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.affiliation: Department of General Surgery, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii; and Department of Clinical Investigation, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii.
authors.forename: Lisa M
authors.initials: LM
authors.lastname: Pierce