Attitudes of Hand Surgeons and Hand Reconstruction Patients Toward Hand Allotransplantation in Taiwan

Applying Health Utility Outcome Measures and Quality-Adjusted Life-Years to Compare Hand Allotransplantation and Myoelectric Prostheses for Upper Extremity Amputations

BACKGROUND

An amputation of the upper extremity not only is devastating for the patient's physical, emotional, and social well-being but also constitutes a financial stress for both the patient and the health care system. The objective of this study was to determine the utility and quality-adjusted life-years of hand allotransplantation versus myoelectric prostheses and to compare these measures in patients afflicted with unilateral versus bilateral amputations.

METHODS

A survey was administered on bilateral amputees, unilateral amputees, replantation patients, and healthy controls. Patient demographics, functional patient-reported outcomes, quality-of-life questionnaires, and utility outcome measures were calculated for four different scenarios: hand transplantation and myoelectric prostheses with or without complications.

RESULTS

Five bilateral amputees, 12 unilateral amputees, nine replantation patients, and 45 healthy controls completed the survey. The highest quality-adjusted life-years were obtained in the replantation patient group for the scenario of myoelectric prosthesis without complications (mean, 34.8 years). Altogether, there was no statistically significant difference between hand transplantation and myoelectric prostheses (p = 0.36). On subgroup analysis, unilateral amputees reported significantly higher quality-adjusted life-years for myoelectric prostheses rather than hand transplantation (6.4; p = 0.0015), whereas bilateral amputees did not demonstrate a significant difference (-2.4; p = 0.299).

CONCLUSIONS

Utility and quality-adjusted life-years do not differ significantly between hand transplantation and myoelectric prostheses, except in unilateral amputees with myoelectric prostheses, who had higher quality-of-life scores. Based on trends from this pilot study, myoelectric prostheses may be considered for unilateral amputees, whereas no superiority can be demonstrated between both treatments in bilateral amputees.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Evaluating Treatment Preferences and Perceptions of a Prosthetic Versus a Transplanted Hand: A Conjoint Analysis-Based Study

INTRODUCTION

This study used a conjoint analysis-based survey to assess which factors are most influential when considering treatment with a prosthesis or transplant after a unilateral hand amputation.

METHODS

Overall, 469 respondents were recruited using Amazon Mechanical Turk and asked to assume that they experienced a hand amputation. To determine preferences for a prosthetic, respondents chose among 11 pairs of alternatives with variations in the following attributes: appearance, function, maintenance, and learning time. Respondents were then presented with descriptions of the risks and outcomes of hand transplantation. The most compelling reasons for and against a transplant were determined and characteristics predictive of support for a transplant were identified.

RESULTS

The most important attributes for a prosthesis were "lifelike appearance" and "myolectric function." For hand transplantation, respondents were most concerned about immunosuppression side effects (n = 323, 69%) and the intense nature of surgery (n = 275, 59%), whereas the most positive benefit was the concept of the transplant being "natural" (n = 339, 72%). When faced with the choice of a hand transplant or a prosthetic, approximately 50% of respondents chose a transplantation. Younger age, previous medical experiences, a perceived "familiarity with medical issues," and the regular attendance of religious services were associated with strong support for a hand transplantation (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

When considering a hand prosthesis, respondents are motivated most by appearance and function. Meanwhile, with hand transplantation, the risks of immunosuppression and the intense nature of surgery and recovery are predominant concerns. These findings may help inform patient-physician discussions when considering treatment after unilateral hand amputation.

Limitations and limits and of vascularized composite allotransplantations: can we reach the holy grail?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In recent times, vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA) have been gaining more attention and applications. Currently, VCA are at the highest level of the reconstruction pyramid, and thus the effects expected after them are intended to outweigh what the 'classical' reconstructive surgery can offer us, including even the most advanced microsurgical techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over 40 patients have received a partial or full-face transplant. Others have received penis, uterus, larynx, abdominal wall, and lower extremity transplants. Each type of VCA has its own problems and limitations. However, resolving the limits defined by immunosuppression and improved donor selection would revolutionize all of them.

SUMMARY

Defining the limits and limitations of given procedures will not only allow for better preparation of transplant teams but will also help in determining the direction of future research.