Traumatic digit amputation is a common injury with life-altering consequences for thousands of patients each year. In this study, we aim to update and expand the reported outcomes of return-to-work (RTW) and functional recovery in patients treated with digit replant after traumatic amputation.

A PRISMA-guided systematic review was performed to identify all published articles related to digit replantation following amputation. We queried the following 4 databases: Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed-MEDLINE. A total of 31 studies were included in the analysis of return-to-work data.

Of the 31 included studies, 26 studies reported that 1976 digits were successfully replanted, while 27 studies reported that 300 replants failed (86.8% success rate). Among 1087 patients in these studies, 82.9% who underwent replantation returned to work. The mean RTW time in 16 studies was 4.7 months (weighted average). Return-to-work time ranged from 0 to 26 months in 12 studies. Of 352 patients who returned to work in 17 studies, 90.9% resumed their previous occupation, while 29 (8.2%) changed occupations. The RTW for finger-only replantations was significantly lower compared to thumb-only, distal digit-only, and any digit replantations (66.0% vs 82.8%; 66.0% vs 87.6%; 66.0% vs 82.9%).

Despite a declining prevalence of digit replantation surgery in recent years, this study illustrates that replantation provides beneficial outcomes for patients with a high return-to-work rate.

This study aims to evaluate the long-term psychosocial and functional outcomes of successful digital replantation following traumatic amputation.

Patients that underwent successful replantation (i.e. no secondary amputation following replantation) of one or more traumatically amputated digits between January 2009 and April 2019 were invited to participate in this study. In addition to a custom questionnaire on psychosocial and socioeconomic aspects of life, various Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) questionnaires regarding global health, upper extremity function, and depressive symptoms were completed. Bivariate analyses were performed to identify significant associations between outcomes and explanatory variables.

Thirty-six patients were successfully enrolled and completed the questionnaires at a median follow-up of 6.1 years. The median PROMIS score for Upper Extremity Function (40.6) was considerably different from the score that is typically found in the general population (all PROMIS instruments are calibrated with a control group score of 50.0), but the median PROMIS scores for Global Health - Physical (49.0), Global Health - Mental (50.7), and Depression (45.6) were comparable to those among the general population. Dominant hand injury, a greater number of injured digits, higher age at the time of injury, and the need for neuropathic pain medication were associated with lower Upper Extremity Function scores (all p < 0.05). Additionally, the presence of neuroma was associated with negative changes in both household finances and mental well-being (p < 0.05).

At long-term follow-up, a majority of patients that underwent replantation of traumatically amputated digits seem to cope well based on psychosocial and functional outcomes. However, neuropathic pain and the presence of neuroma are strong negative factors. Specific attention to digital nerves at the time of surgery is crucial in the management of traumatic amputations.

Digital replantation for traumatic amputation has become the standard of care with advances in microsurgical techniques and technology. While digital replantation has progressed significantly, there are still gaps in knowledge in many aspects. Some of the controversial topics in digital replantation include the indications and contraindications, anesthesia, number of vessel anastomoses, mechanism of injury, role of vein graft, distal fingertip replantation, and postoperative management. This article is a narrative review that discusses these controversies and current issues pertaining to digital replantation.

PubMed, Web of Science, and Google scholar were searched using keywords relating to "digit replantation", "amputation", and "digital replant" with the following terms: "indications", "contraindications", "anaesthesia", "survival", "vessels", "mechanism of injury", "vein graft", "outcome", and "thrombophylaxis". Relevant articles pertaining to digital replantation and deemed by the authors as current or controversial were included.

The reported survival rates of digital replantation are high. With the advancement of microsurgical techniques and technology, the boundaries of digital replantation continue to be pushed. Various methods have been described recently to improve the success rates of difficult replants, such as strategies for venous outflow and vein grafting. However, there are still aspects of digital replantation that remain unanswered, such as the number of veins to anastomose and the thromboprophylaxis regime.

The review delves into controversial aspects of digital replantation, including contraindications, anesthesia, and postoperative management. Indications and contraindications will continue to evolve alongside advancements in microsurgical techniques and anesthesia. It highlights key factors influencing survival rates, such as the number of repaired vessels and the mechanism of injury. Finally, the review consolidates strategies for managing challenging digital replantations.

Failure of digit replantation after traumatic amputation is difficult to predict. The authors aimed to develop a prognostic model to better identify factors that better predict replantation failure following traumatic digit amputation.

In this multicenter prospective cohort, the authors identified patients who had received digit replantation between 1 January 2015 and 1 January 2019. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed successively to identify independently predictive factors for failure of replanted digit. To reduce overfitting, the Bayesian information criterion was used to reduce variables in the original model. Nomograms were created with the reduced model after model selection. This model was then internally validated with bootstrap resampling and further externally validated in validation cohort.

Digit replantation was failed in 101 of 1062 (9.5%) digits and 146 of 1156 digits (12.6%) in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. The authors found that six independent prognostic variables were associated with digit replantation failure: age, mechanism of injury, ischemia duration, smoking status, amputation pattern (complete or incomplete), and surgeon's experience. The prediction model achieved good discrimination, with concordance indexes of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76-0.85) and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.65-0.74) in predicting digit failure in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. Calibration curves were well-fitted for both training and validation cohorts.

The proposed prediction model effectively predicted the failure rate of digit replantation for individual digits of all patients. It could assist in selecting the most suitable surgical plan for the patient.

Replantation is an established treatment for traumatic upper extremity amputation. Only a few studies, however, have assessed the patient-reported outcomes of replantation, and the findings of these studies have been conflicting.

(1) Is replantation associated with better hand function than revision amputation? (2) Is replantation associated with better health-related quality of life, less painful cold intolerance, and more pleasing hand esthetics than revision amputation after a traumatic hand amputation?

In this retrospective, comparative study, we collected the details of all patients who sustained a traumatic upper extremity amputation and were treated at the study hospital. Between 2009 and 2019, we treated 2250 patients, and we considered all patients who sustained a traumatic amputation of two or more digital rays or a thumb as potentially eligible. Based on that, 15% (334 of 2250) were eligible; a further 2% (8 of 334) were excluded because of a subsequent new traumatic amputation or bilateral amputation, and another 22% (72 of 334) refused participation, leaving 76% (254 of 334) for analysis here. The primary outcome was the DASH score. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life (EuroQOL-5D [EQ-5D-5L] Index), painful cold intolerance (the Cold Intolerance Symptom Severity score), and hand esthetics (the Michigan Hand Questionnaire aesthetic domain score). The minimum follow-up time for inclusion was 18 months. Patients were classified into two treatment groups: replantation (67% [171 of 254], including successful replantation in 84% [144 of 171] and partially successful replantation in 16% [27 of 171], in which some but not all of the replanted tissue survived), and revision (complete) amputation (33% [83 of 254], including primary revision amputation in 70% [58 of 83] and unsuccessful replantation followed by secondary amputation in 30% [25 of 83]). In this cohort, replantation was performed if possible, and the reason for choosing primary revision amputation over replantation was usually an amputated part that was too severely damaged (15% [39 of 254]) or was unattainable (2% [4 of 254]). Some patients (3% [8 of 254]) refused to undergo replantation, or their health status did not allow replantation surgery and postoperative rehabilitation (3% [7 of 254]). Gender, age (mean 48 ± 17 years in the replantation group versus 50 ± 23 years in the revision amputation group; p = 0.41), follow-up time (8 ± 4 years in the replantation group versus 7 ± 4 years in the revision amputation group; p = 0.18), amputation of the dominant hand, smoking, extent of tissue loss, or presence of arterial hypertension did not differ between the groups. Patients in the replantation group less frequently had diabetes mellitus (5% [8 of 171] versus 12% [10 of 83]; p = 0.03) and dyslipidemia (4% [7 of 171] versus 11% [9 of 83]; p = 0.04) than those in the revision group and more often had cut-type injuries (75% [129 of 171] versus 60% [50 of 83]; p = 0.02).

After controlling for potential confounding variables such as age, injury type, extent of tissue loss before treatment, and accident of the dominant hand, replantation was not associated with better DASH scores than revision amputation (OR 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.33]; p = 0.42). After controlling for potential cofounding variables, replantation was not associated with better EQ-5D-5L Index scores (OR 0.93 [95% CI 0.56 to 1.55]; p = 0.55), differences in Cold Intolerance Symptom Severity scores (OR 0.85 [95% CI 0.51 to 1.44]; p = 0.79), or superior Michigan Hand Questionnaire esthetic domain scores (OR 0.73 [95% CI 0.43 to 1.26]; p = 0.26) compared with revision amputation.

Replantation surgery was conducted, if feasible, in a homogenous cohort of patients who underwent amputation. If the amputated tissue was too severely damaged or replantation surgery was unsuccessful, the treatment resulted in revision (complete) amputation, which was not associated with worse patient-reported outcomes than successful replantation. These results contradict the assumed benefits of replantation surgery and indicate the need for credible evidence to better guide the care of these patients.

Level III, therapeutic study.

To explore the knowledge, attitudes and practice (KAP) towards the postoperative nursing of patients with digit replantation and skin flap transplantation among new nurses.

Cross-sectional survey.

Two tertiary medical centres in Beijing, China.

New nurses with working experience within 2 years.

The demographic characteristics of the nurses and their KAP towards the postoperative nursing of patients with digit replantation and skin flap transplantation were collected using a self-administered questionnaire. The primary outcome was the KAP scores towards the postoperative nursing of patients with digit replantation and skin flap transplantation. The secondary outcomes were the factors associated with the KAP scores and how the KAP dimensions interacted among them.

A total of 206 valid questionnaires were collected. The mean KAP scores were 7.72±3.28 (total score 13; 59.3%), 37.95±6.05 (total score 50; 75.9%) and 38.23±6.12 (total score 45; 84.9%), indicating poor knowledge, moderately favourable attitudes and active practice. The structural equation model analysis showed that knowledge directly influences attitudes (β=0.82, 95%CI 0.60 to 1.05, p<0.001) and that attitudes directly influence practices (β=0.72, 95%CI 0.62 to 0.83, p<0.001). Knowledge had no direct influence on practices (β=0.10, 95%CI -0.09 to 0.29, p=0.313), but the indirect influence was significant (β=0.60, 95%CI 0.41 to 0.78, p<0.001).

The lack of sufficient knowledge towards the postoperative nursing of patients with digit replantation and skin flap transplantation among nurses with <2 years of experience and the correlation among the KAP dimensions suggested the importance of proper training.

The Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Outcome Measure (DASH) is a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for many upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders. In patients with severe traumatic conditions, limited evidence exists regarding the equivalence between DASH and its shortened version, QuickDASH, which is more feasible in clinical practice. The rationale of this study was to analyze the concurrent validity of QuickDASH with respect to DASH in patients with traumatic upper extremity amputation.

This study is based on a consecutive cohort of traumatic upper extremity amputation patients treated with replantation or revision (completion) amputation at Tampere University Hospital between 2009 and 2019. We estimated the concurrent validity of QuickDASH with respect to DASH by correlation coefficients, mean score differences, Bland-Altman plots, and distribution density. Additionally, we assessed internal reliability with Cronbach's alpha coefficients and item-total correlations.

We found a very strong linear correlation between DASH and QuickDASH scores (r = 0.97 [CI 95% 0.97-0.98], p < 0.001). The mean difference between DASH and QuickDASH was minor (MD = -1, SD 4 [CI95% from -1 to 0] p = 0.02). The mean sub-score for the activity domain was higher for QuickDASH than DASH (MD = -3 [CI95% from -4 to -3] p < 0.000) and lower for the symptom domain (MD = 7 [CI95% from 6 to 9] p < 0.000). The Bland and Altman plot showed good agreement between DASH and QuickDASH scores, but there was measurement error in QuickDASH with high scores (r = -0.20, [CI95% from -0.31 to -0.09], p = 0.001).

QuickDASH demonstrates higher total scores than the full DASH and emphasizes rating of activity over symptoms. Still, on average the differences in total scores are likely less than the MCID of DASH, and consequently, this study shows that QuickDASH can be recommended instead of the full DASH when assessing a traumatic condition.

Retrospectively registered.

The replantation of multiple amputated digits is a technically challenging procedure for reconstructive surgeons that requires more time than the replantation of a single digit. We evaluated the effect of multiple-digit replantation on the success of digital replantation.

Patients who experienced digital amputation and underwent digital replantation from January 2018 to December 2021 were studied retrospectively. Patients who experienced successful and failed replantation were compared, as were digits that survived or became necrotic after replantation. A multivariate logistic regression (MLR) analysis was performed to evaluate the independent factors of replanted digit survival.

There were 378 patients with 497 amputated digits who underwent digital replantation. Of all 378 patients, 298 underwent single-digit replantation, and the other 80 patients underwent multiple-digit replantation. A total of 83.3% of the replanted digits survived (414 of 497). Compared with patients with surviving replanted digits, significantly more patients with necrotic replanted digits underwent multiple-digit replantation (37.7% vs. 17.5%, p < 0.001). On the other hand, a digit that developed necrosis after replantation was more likely to have been involved in the replantation of three or more digits (16% vs. 29%, p = 0.005). The subsequent MLR analysis revealed that the likelihood of necrosis was 2.355 (p = 0.003) times higher in the replantation of three or more digits than in the replantation of one or two digits.

Patients who underwent multiple-digit replantation exhibited a higher incidence of necrosis in the replanted digits. In cases involving patients with multiple-digit amputation, it is crucial to prioritize and perform selective replantation based on the amputated digits.

A single digit amputated proximal to the flexor digitorum superficialis (FDS) insertion is a relative contraindication to replantation. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review on replantation of these injuries to synthesize best available evidence on outcomes.

This review was registered in PROSPERO under registration number CRD42021277305. A MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE databases search yielded 1536 studies. Primary clinical studies on single digit replantation and functional outcome with at least 10 cases were included. Data on revision amputation and replantation distal to the FDS were collected as comparators. Data extracted included demographics, type of digit, level of injury, secondary surgeries, duration of sick leave, survival, function, and patient-reported outcomes. All studies were assessed using the Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Intervention (ROBINS-I) tool and data synthesis was completed using RevMan and Microsoft Excel.

Six studies representing 182 replanted single digits that were amputated proximal to the FDS insertion were included. The average PIPJ motion of replanted single digits was 50° in those amputated proximal to the FDS insertion compared to 82.5 in those amputated distal to the FDS. The average Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) score was 84.78 in replantation group versus 76.81 in the amputation group which was statistically significant (p < .00001). Mean Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) score was 12 in replantation group compared to 18.5 in amputation group, however this was not statistically significant (p = .17).

Few studies exist on outcomes of single digit replantations proximal to FDS insertion. Although range of motion is inferior in the replant group, this has increased since initial studies were performed, and patient satisfaction and patient reported outcomes are high. This is promising evidence for achieving reasonable outcomes in replantation of single digits amputated proximal to the FDS.

Level III.

Traumatic digit amputations can result in significant impairment. Optimal surgical treatment is unclear for certain digits in various amputation patterns. Our aim was to compare the contribution of revision amputation vs replantation for each particular digit to functional outcomes.

Prospective cohort study at three tertiary hospitals was conducted in China. Eligible participants were 3192 patients with traumatic digit amputations enrolled from January 1, 2014, to January 1, 2018. The primary outcome was Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) scores 2 years after initial surgery. Secondary outcome was score on the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH).

Of 3192 enrolled patients, 2890 completed the study. Main-effect linear regression showed that participants with replantation of thumb, index, long, and ring (proximal to the proximal interphalangeal [PIP] joint) fingers had significantly better MHQ scores compared to participants with the corresponding finger revision amputation. DASH results were comparable. Finger-finger interaction analyses conducted with multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) revealed that the small finger and ring finger had the smallest and greatest interactions with other fingers, respectively. After stratification by amputation level of thumb, index finger, or long finger, linear regression showed that replantation of the ring finger distal to the PIP joint resulted in better MHQ and DASH when the thumb or long finger was also traumatically amputated proximal to the IP/PIP joint.

Replantation of the thumb, index, long, and ring (proximal to PIP joint) fingers is preferable to revision amputation, regardless of amputation pattern. Replantation of the ring finger amputated distal to PIP was beneficial only when the thumb or long finger was amputated proximal to IP/PIP joint. Replantation or revision amputation of the small finger was indistinguishable in terms of functional outcome. Future investigations and clinical decisions should take into account the role of finger-finger interactions.

A persistent challenge that has limited access and delivery of digit replantation surgery is timing, as ischemia time has traditionally been considered an important determinant of success. However, reports that the viability of amputated digits decreases after 6 hours of warm ischemia and 12 hours of cold ischemia are largely anecdotal. This review evaluates the quality and generalizability of available evidence regarding ischemia times after digit amputation and reported outcomes of "delayed" replantation. We identify substantial limitations in the literature supporting ischemia time cutoffs and recent evidence supporting the feasibility of delayed digit replantation. The current treatment approach for amputation injuries often necessitates transfers or overnight emergency procedures that increase costs and limit availability of digit replantation nationwide. Evidence-based changes to digit replantation protocols could lead to broader availability of this service, as well as improved care quality.