Journals / Gülhane Tıp Dergisi / 2006 / Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 4

Skin graft administration in penile skin defects

Penis cilt defektlerinin onarımında deri greft uygulamaları

Pages
222–225
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The mean follow-up period was 7 months, and satisfactory cosmetic and functional results were achieved with skin graft administration.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Skin or soft tissue losses of the penis cause significant morbidity for the patient, and coverage of these defects may also pose a formidable challenge for the surgeon.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this paper results of the 9 patients treated with skin graft for penile skin defect are evaluated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The mean follow-up period was 7 months, and satisfactory cosmetic and functional results were achieved with skin graft administration.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Deri hastalıkları · Deri nakli · Cerrahi flepler

Abstract

Skin or soft tissue losses of the penis cause significant morbidity for the patient, and coverage of these defects may also pose a formidable challenge for the surgeon. In this paper results of the 9 patients treated with skin graft for penile skin defect are evaluated. Causes of the skin defect were prior surgery in 3 cases, gunshot injury in 5 cases and dermatological disorder in 1 case. Five patients who had relatively small skin loss were treated with full thickness skin graft, whereas 4 cases were treated with split thickness skin graft. Graft thickness was preferred as 0.015 inches. Meshing was not performed but a few stab incisions were done on graft to ease the drainage of particular fluid collected under the graft. Graft was sutured to the skin defect with a 4/0 chromic catgut. A specially designed sponge dressing the penis circumferentially was applied to immobilize the graft and penis. Patients were maintained on bed rest for 5 days, and dressings were changed afterwards. The ratio of graft take was 100% in the patients. The mean follow-up period was 7 months, and satisfactory cosmetic and functional results were achieved with skin graft administration.

Özet

Peniste oluşan deri ya da yumuşak doku kayıpları hasta morbiditesine yol açan önemli sorunlardan birisidir ve bu defektlerin kapatılması cerrah için de problem oluşturabilmektedir. Bu çalışmada penis cilt defekt onarımı için deri grefti uygulanan 9 hastaya ait sonuçlar değerlendirilmiştir. Üç hastada cilt defekti, önceki cerrahi girişime bağlı olarak gelişmişken, 5 hastada ateşli silah yaralanmasına bağlı, bir hastada ise deri hastalığına bağlı gelişmişti. Cilt defektinin küçük olduğu 5 hastada tam kat deri grefti kullanılırken, diğer hastalarda parsiyel kalınlıkta deri grefti kullanıldı. Bu greftler için kalınlık 0.015 “inch” olarak tercih edildi. Greftler "mesh"lenmedi, ancak greft altında birikecek sıvının drenajını sağlamak için greftte sınırlı sayıda delik açıldı. Greftler penisteki cilt defektine 4/0 krome katgüt ile sütüre edildi. Penisi ve grefti immobilize etmek için penisi çepeçevre saran özel sünger pansuman uygulandı. Hastalar 5 gün süresince yatak istirahatinde kalırken pansumanlar da bu süre sonunda açıldı. Dokuz hastada da greft tutma oranı %100'dü. Hastalar 7 ay süresince takip edildi ve bu süre sonunda fonksiyonel ve kozmetik açıdan tatmin edici sonuçlar alındı.

🔖

Cite This Article

ESKİ, M., ŞAHİN, İ., ŞENGEZER, M. (2006). Skin graft administration in penile skin defects. Gülhane Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 4, 222–225. https://ajindex.com/articles/225625

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. McAninchJW. Management of genital skin loss. Urol Clin North Am 1989; 16: 387-397
  2. Vincent MP, Horton CE, Devine CJ. An evaluation of skin grafts for reconstruction of the penis and scrotum.Cliii Plast Surg 1988; 15: 411-424
  3. Latifoglu O, Yavuzer R, Demir Y, Ayhan S, Yenidunya S, Atabay K. Surgical management of penoscrotal lymphangioma circumscriptum. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999; 103: 175-178
  4. Ferro F, Spagnoli A, Villa M, Papendieck CM. A salvage surgical solution for recurrent lymphangioma of the prepuce. Br J Plast Surg 2005; 58: 97-99
  5. Parkash S, Gajendran V. Surgical reconstruction of the sequelae of penile and scrotal gangrene: a plea for simplicity. Br J Plast Surg 1984; 37: 354-357
  6. Castanâres S, Belt E. Surgical reconstruction of the penis in skin losses using scrotum skin. Br J Plast Surg 1968; 21: 253-255
  7. Weinfeld AB, Kelley P, Yüksel E, et.al. Circumferential negative pressure dressing (VAC) to bolster skin grafts in the reconstruction of the penile shaft and scrotum. Ann Plast Surg 2005; 54: 178-183
  8. Lippin Y, Shvoron A, Tsur H. A simple splinting device for skin grafts of the penis. Ann Plast Surg 1992; 29: 185-186
  9. Netscher DT, Marchi M, Wigoba P. A method for optimizing skin graft healing and outcome of wounds of the penile shaft and scrotum. Ann Plast Surg 1992; 31: 447-449. lO.Yano K, Kubo T, Takagi S, Nakai K, Hosokawa K. Fixation for skin grafting of penis with a polyurethane foam. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 109: 818-819. 11.Latifoglu O, Yavuzer R, Çenetoğlu S, Baran NK. Syringe splinting for skin grafts in penile reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999; 103: 747-748. 12.Housinger TA, Keller B, Warden GD. Management of burns to the penis. J Burn Care Rehabil 1993; 14: 525-527. 13.Gencosmanoğlu R, Bilkay U, Alper M, Gürler T, Çağdaş A. Late results of split-grafted penoscrotal avulsion injuries. J Trauma 1995; 39: 1201-1203. 14-Morey AF, Meng MV, McAninchJW. Skin graft reconstruction of chronic lymphedema. Urology 1997; 50: 423-426. 15.Black PC, Friedrich LH, Engrav LH, Wessels H. Meshed unexpanded splitthickness skin grafting for reconstruction penile skin loss. J Urol 2004; 172:976-979. 16.ROSS R, Walther P. Full-thickness skin grafts from eyelid to penis, plus splitthickness grafts in chronic balanitis xerotica obliterans. Ann Plast Surg 1997; 38:173-175. 17.Fifer TD, Pieper D, Hawtof D. Contraction rates of meshed, nonexpanded split-thickness skin grafts versus split-thickness sheet grafts. Ann Plast Surg 19