Optimising size and depth of punch grafts in autologous transplantation of vitiligo and piebaldism: a randomised controlled trial

Figures & data

Figure 1. Patient flow diagram.

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of study population.

Sex
Male	13 (47%)
Female	20 (53%)
Age (years), mean (median; min–max)	35,8 (36;18 − 61)
Fitzpatrick skin photo type
II	7 (21%)
III	20 (61%)
IV	4 (12%)
V	1 (3%)
VI	1 (3%)
Treatment indication
Non-segmental vitiligo	12 (36%)
Segmental vitiligo	6 (18%)
Piebaldism	15 (46%)
Treatment location
Trunk	14 (43%)
Extremities lower	12 (36%)
Upper	7 (21%)
Type of UV treatment
UVA	28 (85%)
NB-UVB	5 (15%)
Duration of vitiligo (N = 18) (%)
1–5 year	3 (9%)
5–10 year	0 (0%)
Longer than 10 years	15 (91%)
VIDA score, (N = 18) (%)
0	9 (50%)
−1	9 (50%)

N = 33. Data present N (%).

Figure 2. Total pigmented surface area of 4 grafts per treatment region. Data represent median; IQR (50.3 mm², 33.0 mm², 29.1 mm² and 23.6 mm² in respectively 1.5 mm deep grafts, 1.5 mm superficial grafts, 1 mm superficial grafts and 1 mm deep grafts.) p < 0.001, calculated with the related samples of Friedman’s two-way analysis of variance by ranks. N = 30.

Table 2. PGA of the general outcome of both donor and recipient sites 6 months after grafting.

Donor (N = 28)	1.5 mm deep	1.5 mm superficial	1 mm deep	1-mm superficial
	Poor 1 (3.6%)	–	–	–
	Neutral 5 (17.9%)	Neutral 4 (14.3%)	Neutral 3 (10.7%)	Neutral 2 (7.1%)
	Good 10 (35.7%)	Good 11 (39.3%)	Good 13 (46.4%)	Good 14 (50%)
	Very good 12 (42.9%)	Very good 13(46.4%)	Very good 12(42.9%)	Very good 12(42.9%)
Recipient (N = 25)	1.5-mm deep	1.5-mm superficial	1-mm deep	1-mm superficial
	Very poor 3 (12%)	Very poor 3 (12%)	Very poor 3 (12%)	Very poor 3 (12%)
	Poor 2 (8%)	Poor 1 (4%)	Poor 2 (8%)	Poor 3 (12%)
	Neutral 1 (4%)	Neutral 4 (16%)	Neutral 2 (8%)	Neutral 3 (12%)
	Good 12 (48%)	Good 12 (48%)	Good 14 (56%)	Good 12 (48%)
	Very good 7 (28%)	Very good 5 (20%)	Very good 4 (16%)	Very good 4 (16%)

Data present number of patients (%).

Table 3. Side effects in the donor and recipient sites.

	1.5 mmdeep	1.5 mmsuperficial	1 mmdeep	1 mmsuperficial
Donor
Hyperpigmentation
N of patients	4	2	2	1
Severity (n pts)	1(3), 2(1)	1(2)	1(2)	1(1)
Hypopigmentation
N of patients	14	11	10	7
Severity (n pts)	1(11), 2(2), 3(1)	1(8), 2(2), 3(1)	1(7), 2(2), 3(1)	1(6),2(1)
Scar
N of patients	2	2	2	1
Severity (n pts)	1(2)	1(2)	1(1), 2(1)	1(1)
Erythema
N of patients	10	5	5	3
Severity (n pts)	1(9), 2(1)	1(5)	1(5)	1(3)
Relief
N of patients	4	3	2	0
Severity (n pts)	1(4)	1(3)	1(2)	0
Recipient site
Hyperpigmentation
N of patients	7	5	4	4
Severity (n pts)	1(7)	1(5)	1(4)	1(4)
Hypopigmentation
N of patients	2	3	3	2
Severity (n pts)	1(2)	1(3)	1(3)	1(2)
Scar
N of patients	0	0	1	0
Severity (n pts)	0	0	1(1)	0
Cobble stone
N of patients	7	6	4	3
Severity (n pts)	1(5), 2(2)	1(5), 2(1)	1(4)	1(3)

Data represent number (N) of patients that showed a certain side effect. Severity of the side effects was assessed on a categorical scale from 0–3 (were 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate and 3 = severe, on a certain number of patients (n pts). 6 months after grafting. N = 30.