↓ Skip to main content

Retrospective review of a tertiary adult burn centre’s experience with modified Meek grafting

Overview of attention for article published in Burns & Trauma, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Retrospective review of a tertiary adult burn centre’s experience with modified Meek grafting
Published in
Burns & Trauma, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41038-016-0031-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Namal Munasinghe, Jason Wasiak, Andrew Ives, Heather Cleland, Cheng Hean Lo

Abstract

Autologous split skin grafting is the gold standard in treating patients with massive burns. However, the limited availability of donor sites remains a problem. The aim of this study is to present our experience with the modified Meek technique of grafting, outcomes achieved and recommendations for optimized outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed patient records from our tertiary referral burn centre and the Bi-National Burns Registry to identify all patients who had modified Meek grafting between 2010 and 2013. Patient records were reviewed individually and information regarding patient demographics, mechanism of injury and surgical management was recorded. Outcome measures including graft take rate, requirement for further surgery and complications were also recorded. Eleven patients had modified Meek grafting procedures. The average age of patients was 46 years old (range 23 - 64). The average total body surface area (TBSA) burnt was 56.75 % (range 20-80 %). On average, 87 % of the grafted areas healed well and did not require regrafting. In the regrafted areas, infection was the leading cause of graft failure. Modified Meek grafting is a useful method of skin expansion. Similar to any other grafting technique, infection needs to be sought and treated promptly. It is recommended for larger burns where donor sites are not adequate or where it is desirable to limit their extent.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Other 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 17 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Unknown 18 50%