Mp06-06 Use of Fish Skin Xenograft for Donor Site Closure in Buccal Harvest

You have accessJournal of UrologyReconstruction: Urethral Reconstruction (including stricture) I (MP06)1 May 2024MP06-06 USE OF FISH SKIN XENOGRAFT FOR DONOR SITE CLOSURE IN BUCCAL HARVEST Talia Stark and Gregory Amend Talia StarkTalia Stark and Gregory AmendGregory Amend View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001009452.79331.fd.06AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: A new alternative xenograft available is the Kerecis Omega3 Surgibind. It is an intact fish skin that is FDA approved as a reinforcement for soft tissue to expedite revascularization, cellular ingrowth, and tissue remodeling. Use of buccal mucosa graft for urologic reconstructive surgeries is well established. However, the management of the graft donor site is not standardized and can be closed primarily, by secondary intent, or with coverage of the defect. The goal of this novel technique using Surgibind for buccal graft site closure is to determine whether patient outcomes of post-operative site bleeding, pain, mouth contracture, recovery time, and resuming regular diet are improved compared to other closure types. METHODS: The endotracheal tube is taped to the right side of the face, and the patient's mouth is prepped. Stensen duct is identified. Three silk stitches are placed through the lips and cheek for traction. The mucosa is infiltrated with Marcaine with epinephrine solution. The buccal mucosa is then harvested. Minimal spot cautery is used as the Surgibind is best placed on a lightly bleeding wound bed. The xenograft is cut to the wound size before hydration with 2 cc room temperature sterile saline for 30 seconds. The graft site is then closed using the xenograft with 4-0 chromic suture running along all sides of the defect. An example of xenograft use is demonstrated in Figure 1. RESULTS: Surgibind was used for buccal graft site closure for 3 patients. It was very easy to use with little preparation. Meticulous hemostasis was achieved with suture placement of the xenograft with no postoperative bleeding. Post-operative donor site pain was not reported. A regular diet was resumed within 1-2 days. At 1 week, the xenograft was well incorporated with the donor site mucosa, with no defects, shrinking of the xenograft tissue, or evidence of mouth contracture. CONCLUSIONS: Surgibind is proven to accelerate healing and improve outcomes of graft donor sites in other areas of the body. Post-operative outcomes of the buccal graft donor site using Surgibind are promising, including no mouth pain, early tolerance of regular diet, and excellent incorporation into the graft site with no evidence of mouth contracture. A prospective study comparing outcomes of the closure of the buccal mucosa graft site with Surgibind vs. primary closure would be beneficial. Download PPT Source of Funding: None © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e53 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Talia Stark More articles by this author Gregory Amend More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...