Is lower limb salvage worthwhile after severe open tibial fractures in a developing country? An analysis of surgical outcomes, quality of life and cost implications

Limb salvage versus primary amputation in Gustilo-Anderson IIIB and IIIC tibial fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The last systematic review on this topic was published in 2008. With advances in surgical techniques, patients with mangled extremities may now be potentially salvageable with comparable outcomes. This review aims to evaluate the outcomes of limb salvage compared to primary amputation in patients with severe open tibial fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search on PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CENTRAL and CINAHL was performed from inception to 19 January 2022. The primary outcome was to evaluate clinical and functional outcomes. Secondary outcomes were to evaluate pain, patient preference, quality of life, and patient preferences. Methodological quality was evaluated using the MINORS criteria. Pooled estimates of relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as a summary statistic for dichotomous variables and continuous variables, respectively.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies with 645 patients met inclusion criteria. The methodological quality was moderate based on the MINORS score. The majority were male. Mean age was 36.3 years. There was no significant differences in the length of hospitalization (n = 8), return to work rates (n = 9), return to sport rates (n = 4) and quality of life scores (n = 4). Patients with primary amputation had a significantly lower risk of total complications (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08-0.53, p = 0.001) (n = 10), infections (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.25-0.85, p = 0.01) (n = 9), and number of surgeries (MD - 4.17, 95% CI - 6.49 to - 1.85, p = 0.0004) (n = 6). Patients with primary amputation were able to ambulate significantly earlier (MD - 4.06, 95% CI - 7.65 to - 0.46, p = 0.03) (n = 3). Three studies found a significantly higher cost of hospitalization in limb salvage patients. Functional outcomes were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

While patients with primary amputation had better clinical outcomes in the short-term, functional outcomes were not significantly different in both groups. Despite the heterogenicity of the results in this review, surgeons need to contextualize the decision making for their patients and incorporate these findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022303357.

Clinical effectiveness of the Ganga Hospital Open Injury Severity Score for limb salvage versus amputation in patients with complex limb injuries : a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Clinical management of open fractures is challenging and frequently requires complex reconstruction procedures. The Gustilo-Anderson classification lacks uniform interpretation, has poor interobserver reliability, and fails to account for injuries to musculotendinous units and bone. The Ganga Hospital Open Injury Severity Score (GHOISS) was designed to address these concerns. The major aim of this review was to ascertain the evidence available on accuracy of the GHOISS in predicting successful limb salvage in patients with mangled limbs.

METHODS

We searched electronic data bases including PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify studies that employed the GHOISS risk tool in managing complex limb injuries published from April 2006, when the score was introduced, until April 2021. Primary outcome was the measured sensitivity and specificity of the GHOISS risk tool for predicting amputation at a specified threshold score. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, need for plastic surgery, deep infection rate, time to fracture union, and functional outcome measures. Diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis was performed using a random effects bivariate binomial model.

RESULTS

We identified 1,304 records, of which six prospective cohort studies and two retrospective cohort studies evaluating a total of 788 patients were deemed eligible for inclusion. A diagnostic test meta-analysis conducted on five cohort studies, with 474 participants, showed that GHOISS at a threshold score of 14 has a pooled sensitivity of 93.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 78.4 to 98.2) and a specificity of 95% (95% CI 88.7 to 97.9) for predicting primary or secondary amputations in people with complex lower limb injuries.

CONCLUSION

GHOISS is highly accurate in predicting success of limb salvage, and can inform management and predict secondary outcomes. However, there is a need for high-quality multicentre trials to confirm these findings and investigate the effectiveness of the score in children, and in predicting secondary amputations.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(1):21-28.