Abstract
The controlled removal of the epidermis and the dermis is highly employed for the treatment of photoaging and scar repair. Such procedure is also known as resurfacing, and it includes procedures such as chemical peelings, ablative laser, dermabrasion, and microneedling.
Several options of dressings used in pre- and postoperative wound care are now available and focus on the acceleration of reepithelization, reducing the recovery period and minimizing discomfort.
The maintenance of a local moist environment is one of the most important conditions for satisfactory wound healing, thus being one of the main goals of using dressings. Other important characteristics of dressings include their ability to absorb exudates, impermeability to bacteria and external water, pain relief, decreased damage during dressing removal, comfort, absence of particle contamination, frequency of dressing change, and their effect on the formation of unaesthetic scars.
Wound dressings may be basic (cotton gauzes), advanced (hydrogels, hydrocolloids, and films), and antimicrobial. They may also be divided into two groups: open and closed methods. Impregnated gauzes, semipermeable films, hydrogels, tulle fabric dressings, and silicone gel are examples that can be used, depending on the type of the procedure.
Possible complications are maceration, hypersensitivity reactions, and dressings that may become loose or dislodged and result in infection.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Sasseron MGM. Atualidades em curativos oclusivos e semi-oclusivos. In: Malagutti W, Kakihara CT, editors. Curativos, estomias e dermatologia: uma abordagem multiprofissional. São Paulo: Martinari; 2014. p. 129–43.
Eaglstein WH. Moist wound healing with occlusive dressings: a clinical focus. Dermatol Surg. 2001;27(2):175–81.
Smaniotto PHS, Ferreira MC, Isaac C, Galli R. Sistematização de curativos para o tratamento clínico das feridas. Rev. Bras. Cir. Plást. 2012;27(4):623–6.
Delmore B, Cohen JM, O'Neill D, Chu A, Pham V, Chiu E. Reducing postsurgical wound complications: a critical review. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2017;30(6):272–86.
Dumville JC, Gray TA, Walter CJ, Sharp CA, Page T, Macefield R, Blencowe N, Milne TK, Reeves BC, Blazeby J. Dressings for the prevention of surgical site infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;12:CD003091.
Mandelbaum SH, Di Santis EP, Mandelbaum MHS. Cicatrização: conceitos atuais e recursos auxiliares - Parte II. An Bras Dermatol. 2003;78(5):521–2.
Newman JP, Fitzgerald P, Koch RJ. Review of closed dressings after laser resurfacing. Dermatol Surg. 2000;26(6):562–71.
Kadunc BV, di Chiacchio N, Trindade Almeida AR. Tulle or veil fabric: a versatile option for dressings. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002;47(1):129–32.
Khatri KA, Bhawan J, Bhatty RS, Garcia V. Comparison of the open technique with a new wound dressing, H2460, in the healing of an acute wound after laser skin resurfacing. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2007;9:173–80.
Duke D, Grevelink JM. Care before and after laser skin resurfacing – a survey and review of the literature. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2007;9:173–80.
Terrill PJ, Varughese G. A comparison of three primary non-adherent dressings applied to hand surgery wounds. J Wound Care. 2000;9(8):359–63.
Okan G, Rendon MI. The effects of a high glycerin content hydrogel premolded mask dressing on post-laser resurfacing wounds. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2011;13(4):162–5.
Radwanski HN, Correa WEM, Refosco TJ, Farrapeira Junior A, Pitanguy I. Silicone gel em cicatrizes de cirurgia plástica: estudo clínico prospectivo. Rev Bras Cir Plást. 2010;25(3):428–33.
Kerwin LY, El Tal AK, Stiff MA, Fakhouri TM. Scar prevention and remodeling: a review of the medical, surgical, topical and light treatment approaches. Int J Dermatol. 2014;53(8):922–36.
Reis NA, Machado Filho CDS, Timoner FR. Profilaxia em cirurgia dermatológica. Surg Cosmet Dermatol. 2010;2(1):47–53.
Newman JP, Koch RJ, Goode RL. Closed dressings after laser skin resurfacing. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998;124(7):751–7.
Marini L, Odendaal D, Smirnyi S. Importance of scar prevention and treatment— an approach from wound care principles. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43:S85–90.
Costa FB, El Ammar ABPC, Campos VB, Kalil CLPV. Complications in laser dermatologic surgery. Part II: fractional and non-fractional ablative laser and fractional non-ablative laser. Surg Cosmet Dermatol. 2011;3(2):135–46.
El Ammar ABPC, Costa FB, Kalil CLPV, Campos VB. Complications in laser dermatologic surgery Part I: Non-fractional non-ablative lasers. Surg Cosmet Dermatol. 2011;3(1):47–53.
Faz A. Efeito do uso de silicone em spray na Reparação cutânea em procedimentos envolvendo ablação epidérmica: estudo de 20 casos. Surg Cosmet Dermatol. 2011;3(1):41–6.416.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
da Glória Martin Sasseron, M., Lage, R., Mercadante, L.M., de Castro Fernandes, L. (2020). Introduction: Dressings to Improve Healing in Cosmetic Procedures. In: Costa, A. (eds) Minimally Invasive Aesthetic Procedures . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78265-2_83
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78265-2_83
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-78264-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-78265-2
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)