Skin Necrosis pp 257-263 | Cite as

Surgical Debridement

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

Surgical debridement in chronic wounds plays pivotal roles. Debridement is considered to fasten the wound healing rate and time and reduce the wound area by removing necrotic wound bed, wound edge tissue like hyperkeratotic epidermis, necrotic dermis, foreign debris, and bacterial pathogens, which bring inhibitory effects on wound healing [1]. There is marked cytoplasmic reduction and localization of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in the epidermis by microarray analysis, which indicates that the nonhealing keratinocytes have attenuated capacity to respond to EGF. Along with epidermal and keratinocyte inhibition, fibroblasts derived from nonhealing wounds demonstrate slower migration [2]. All these information with molecular analysis suggest that proper surgical debridement may be a reasonable solution to overcome this problem. Surgical debridement is considered one of the essential choices in accelerating and optimizing the wound healing; however, the evidences of this technique and rationale should be further discussed in each pathologic condition such as leg and diabetic foot ulcer.

Keywords

Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Pressure Ulcer Surgical Debridement Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Postcapillary Venule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Cardinal M, Eisenbud DE, Armstrong DG, Zelen C, Driver V, Attinger C, Phillip T, Harding K. Serial surgical debridement: a retrospective study on clinical outcomes in chronic lower extremity wounds. Wound Repair Regen. 2009;17:306–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brem H, Stojadinovic O, Diergelmann RF, Entero H, Lee B, Pastar I, Golinko M, Rosenberg H, Tomic-Canic M. Molecular markers in patients with chronic wounds to guide surgical debridement. Mol Med. 2007;13:30–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang XQ, Kempf M, Liu PY, Cuttle L, Chang HE, Kravchuk O, Mill J, Phillips GE, Kimble RM. Conservative surgical debridement as a burn treatment: supporting evidence from a porcine model. Wound Repair Regen. 2008;16:774–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stannard JP, Volgas DA, Stewart R, McGwin Jr G, Alonso JE. Negative pressure wound therapy after severe open fractures: a prospective randomized study. J Orthop Trauma. 2009;23:552–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    VanGilder C, MacFarlene GD, Harrison P, Lachenbruch C, Meyer S. The demographics of suspected deep tissue injury in the United States: an analysis of the international pressure ulcer prevalence survey 2006–2009. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2010;23:254–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Edwards J, Stapley S. Debridement of diabetic foot ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;1:CD003556.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Golinko MS, Joffe R, Maggi J, Cox D, Chandrasekaran EB, Tomic-Canic RM, Brem H. Operative debridement of diabetic foot ulcers. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;207:e1–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stojadinovic O, Brem H, Vouthounis C, Lee B, Fallon J, Stallcup M, Merchant A, Galiano RD, Tomic-Canic M. Molecular pathogenesis of chronic wounds: the role of beta-catenin and c-myc in the inhibition of epithelialization and wound healing. Am J Pathol. 2005;167:59–69.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coleridge S. Deleterious effects of white cells in the course of skin damage in CVI. Int Angiol. 2002;21:26–32.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Developmental and Reconstructive MedicineGraduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki UniversityNagasakiJapan

Personalised recommendations