Abstract
A polytetrafluoroethylene-polyurethane laminate was evaluated as a temporary wound cover and compared with porcine xenograft in a series of 22 patients. The most striking difference between the two materials was that the prosthesis was far superior to pigskin with respect to its degree of adherence and its ability to debride. Good adherence of prosthesis or pigskin was associated with later autograft success. No infections were encountered and there was no fragmentation of polyurethane foam into the wound. These initial studies indicate that this prosthetic is useful as a temporary wound dressing. Its characteristics were at least equal to those of pigskin, and in many respects, it was superior.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
