Microsurgical replantation following digital amputation has variable success rates. Sociodemographic factors and surgery-related variables have been shown to influence survival rates; however, few studies have evaluated these data systematically across a combined dataset. Therefore, the objective of this study was to analyze the current literature to identify the predictors of replant survival. A literature review was performed using the PubMed/Medline database focused on complete digit amputation/replantation studies. Studies were evaluated for patient and surgery-related variables and their respective effects on survival. Statistical analysis was conducted to identify predictors of survival and derive pooled estimates from the combined dataset. Thirty-two studies representing more than 6,000 digit amputation/replantation cases met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Statistical analysis revealed the number of venous anastomosis (0 vs. 1 vs. 2), the number of arterial anastomosis (0 vs. 1 vs. 2), and the mechanism of injury (sharp cut versus blunt cut versus avulsion versus crush) to influence replant survival ( < 0.05). The authors failed to find a significant association between survival and the following variables: age, sex, zone of injury, digit number, tobacco use, ischemia time, method of preservation, and use of vein graft. Patient- and surgery-related variables affect digit survival following replantation. The etiology of injury can help risk-stratify patients and assist in an informed decision making process, whereas surgery-related factors can guide surgeon practice to improve clinical outcomes following replantation.
Limited data exist regarding volumetric trends and management of upper-extremity emergencies during periods of social restriction and duress, such as the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. We sought to study the effect of shelter-in-place orders on emergent operative upper-extremity surgery. Methods: All patients undergoing emergent and time-sensitive operations to the finger(s), hand, wrist, and forearm were tracked over an equal number of days before and after shelter-in-place orders at 2 geographically distinct Level I trauma centers. Surgical volume and resources, patient demographics, and injury patterns were compared before and after official shelter-in-place orders. Results: A total of 58 patients underwent time-sensitive or emergent operations. Mean patient age was 42 years; mean injury severity score was 9 and median American Society of Anesthesiologist score was 2. There was a 40% increase in volume after shelter-in-place orders, averaging 1.4 cases/d. Indications for surgery included high-energy closed fracture (60%), traumatic nerve injury (19%), severe soft tissue infection (15%), and revascularization of the arm, hand, or digit(s) (15%). High-risk behavior, defined as lawlessness, assault, and high-speed auto accidents, was associated with a significantly greater proportion of operations after shelter-in-place orders (40% vs 12.5%; P < .05). Each institution dedicated an average of 3 inpatient beds and one intensive care unitecapable bed to upper-extremity care daily. Resources used included an average of 115 minutes of daily operating room time and 8 operating room staff or personnel per case. Conclusions: Hand and upper-extremity operative volume increased after shelter-in-place orders at 2 major Level I trauma centers across the country, demanding considerable hospital resources. The rise in volume was associated with an increase in high-risk behavior. Type of study/level of evidence: Therapeutic IV.
Improved economic and clinical outcomes-as indicated by the reduced lengths of overall and ICU stay, the reduced number of procedures, none of the cases requiring amputation, and the reduced need for skin grafting-may be attainable when the surgeon eventually performing the reconstruction is involved early in management. We propose that, in the interest of improving patient care, a closer collaboration should be established between the reconstructive and primary managing teams.
Background: Digit replantation affords the opportunity to restore hand function following amputation. To date, however, few studies have evaluated functional outcomes following replantation. Therefore, it was the objective of this study to perform a meta-analysis to better characterize the predictors of hand function. Methods: A literature search was performed using the PubMed database to identify studies that focused on digit amputation/replantation and functional outcomes. Studies were evaluated for patient- and injury-related factors and their respective effects on clinical outcomes of sensation, grip strength, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. Statistical analysis was conducted across the pooled data set to identify significant trends. Results: Twenty-eight studies representing 618 replanted digits were included in this study. We found the average grip strength was 78.7% (relative to contralateral), the average 2-point discrimination (2PD) was 7.8 mm, and the average DASH score was 12.81. After conducting statistical analysis, we found patients with more proximal injuries had lower grip strength scores (P < .05). We found 2PD scores were influenced by age, mechanism of injury, and amputation level (P < .05). Finally, we found DASH scores after replantation were predicted by mechanism of injury and level of amputation (P < .05). The following variables did not influence outcomes: gender, tobacco use, ischemia time, and digit number. Conclusions: Digit replant does not restore premorbid hand function but does result in adequate hand function. Expected functional outcomes following replant should be considered in the decision-making process. These data can help risk-stratify patients, guide postreplant expectations, and influence the decision for replantation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.