Timing of forearm arterial repair in the well-perfused limb

Arterial Injury in the Upper Extremity: Evaluation, Strategies, and Anticoagulation Management

Trauma to the upper extremity can present with an associated arterial injury. After patient stabilization, thorough assessment with physical examination and various imaging modalities allows accurate diagnosis of the specific arterial injury. After diagnosis, efficient treatment is necessary to allow limb salvage. Treatment options include ligation, primary repair, graft reconstruction, endovascular repair, and amputation. The final treatment rendered is frequently dependent on injury location and mechanism. With any of the treatment options, complications may occur, including thrombosis. Currently, no validated anticoagulation protocol has been established for managing arterial injuries in the upper extremity.

Delayed Repair of Ulnar Artery at the Distal Forearm

Background:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rate of patency after delayed repair of the ulnar artery following primary ligation. Methods: Adult patients with primary ligation of the injured ulnar artery at the forearm who had a delayed repair of the artery were included. Postoperative arterial patency was determined by either physical examination or color Doppler ultrasonographic imaging. Postoperative complications and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score were recorded. Results: Eight consecutive patients during a 3-year period were included. The mean age was 35 years. Four cases were women. The surgery was performed at a mean of 5 days after the injury and ligation. At a mean follow-up of 22 months, 7 patients had a patent artery. One patient suffered a hematoma. Conclusions: A high rate of patency can be obtained after delayed repair of the ulnar artery at the forearm.

Outcomes of digital artery revascularization in pediatric trauma

BACKGROUND

Digit amputation is rare in pediatric trauma but can lead to functional morbidity. The true incidence of digital arterial injury is lacking in the literature, and revascularization techniques are not well-described.

METHODS

Retrospective review of a pediatric trauma registry identified patients with a digital artery injury between July 2008 and December 2013. Isolated vein injuries and arterial injuries proximal to the digits were excluded. Descriptive statistics were used.

RESULTS

Twenty-five subjects met inclusion. Most were male (n=16; 64%) and the median age was 6.8 (IQR: 2.8, 11.1) years. The most common blunt (n=12) trauma was struck/crushed by object (n=4; 33%) and the most common penetrating (n=13) trauma was because of glass (n=9; 69%). All subjects were managed operatively. Initial operations for arterial repair were primary arterial repair (15; 20%), vein graft (7; 28%), thrombectomy (1; 4%), and amputation (1; 4%). Twelve patients (48%) had reported complications at initial follow-up, but only two (8%) had long-term (>24weeks) sequelae.

CONCLUSION

Digital artery injury is rare among pediatric traumas. Functional outcomes after digital artery revascularization are favorable. Primary repair can successfully manage these injuries and vein grafting appears to be a suitable alternative when primary repair is not feasible.

Evidence-based Comprehensive Approach to Forearm Arterial Laceration

INTRODUCTION

Penetrating injury to the forearm may cause an isolated radial or ulnar artery injury, or a complex injury involving other structures including veins, tendons and nerves. The management of forearm laceration with arterial injury involves both operative and nonoperative strategies. An evolution in management has emerged especially at urban trauma centers, where the multidisciplinary resource of trauma and hand subspecialties may invoke controversy pertaining to the optimal management of such injuries. The objective of this review was to provide an evidence-based, systematic, operative and nonoperative approach to the management of isolated and complex forearm lacerations. A comprehensive search of MedLine, Cochrane Library, Embase and the National Guideline Clearinghouse did not yield evidence-based management guidelines for forearm arterial laceration injury. No professional or societal consensus guidelines or best practice guidelines exist to our knowledge.

DISCUSSION

The optimal methods for achieving hemostasis are by a combination approach utilizing direct digital pressure, temporary tourniquet pressure, compressive dressings followed by wound closure. While surgical hemostasis may provide an expedited route for control of hemorrhage, this aggressive approach is often not needed (with a few exceptions) to achieve hemostasis for most forearm lacerations. Conservative methods mentioned above will attain the same result. Further, routine emergent or urgent operative exploration of forearm laceration injuries are not warranted and not cost-beneficial. It has been widely accepted with ample evidence in the literature that neither injury to forearm artery, nerve or tendon requires immediate surgical repair. Attention should be directed instead to control of bleeding, and perform a complete physical examination of the hand to document the presence or absence of other associated injuries. Critical ischemia will require expeditious surgical restoration of arterial perfusion. In a well-perfused hand, however, the presence of one intact artery is adequate to sustain viability without long-term functional disability, provided the palmar arch circulation is intact. Early consultation with a hand specialist should be pursued, and follow-up arrangement made for delayed primary repair in cases of complex injury.

CONCLUSION

Management in accordance with well-established clinical principles will maximize treatment efficacy and functional outcome while minimizing the cost of medical care.