Postoperative Digit and Hand Replantation Protocols: A Review of the Literature

Evidence-based postoperative replantation protocols

Postoperative care is essential to upper extremity replantation success and includes careful and frequent monitoring of the replanted part. During this period, pharmacologic agents such as antithrombotic and anticoagulants may prevent complications such as arterial thrombosis and venous congestion. Dressings and therapy can also impact short- and long-term outcomes following replantation. This article reviews the literature to provide guidance for postoperative protocols following upper extremity replantation.

Principles of microvascular surgery in the upper extremity

Upper extremity replantation and microsurgery can be challenging even for the experienced hand and upper extremity surgeon and requires thoughtful consideration and evaluation. This review aims to discuss the general considerations in upper extremity replantation management from the preoperative through the postoperative period.

Indications for replantation and factors that predict success

Since the advent of replantation techniques, there has been uneven progress in terms of success-even considering whether success is defined as continued perfusion of the digit or long term functional outcomes. Early enthusiasm and success have not been maintained despite increasing familiarity with microsurgical techniques and greater understanding of how to optimize outcomes for the individual components of replantation such as tendon repair, nerve repair, and osteosynthesis. Practitioners participating in the care of patients undergoing replantation should be familiar with the history and current understanding of both the indications and contraindications for the procedure, post-operative rehabilitation, and factors contributing to functional outcomes. A review of the literature from the first publications on the topic demonstrates evolution in practice and understanding of which patients should be indicated for replantation. Indications can be considered in three broad categories: injury factors, patient factors, and care context factors. These factors intersect with one another and can inform the surgeon pre-operatively regarding the most likely outcome for a given patient. This insight is critical to discuss pre-operatively with the patient in order to make a shared decision about how to manage their injury.

Partial hand replantation using free microsurgical replantation with staged heterotopic banking of amputated parts: towards improving long term outcomes

In hand trauma, the uninjured forearm has been touted as the ideal site for ectopic banking in digit/hand amputations. Here, we describe the temporary ectopic implantation and subsequent replantation of a partially amputated hand and highlight the "Three R's" - Recovery, Rehabilitation, and Revision over the first year of recovery.

Outcomes of Flexor Tendon Repair in Patients With Concurrent Neurovascular Injuries of Multiple Digits in Zone 1

PURPOSE

We treated several patients with multiple flexor (flexor digitorum profundus; FDP) injuries accompanied by injuries to the digital nerve or vessels around the distal interphalangeal crease (zone 1). Here, we retrospectively report the outcomes and review the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2010 and December 2018, 16 patients who met the study inclusion criteria were investigated. Tendons were repaired using the cross-locked cruciate (Adelaide) technique (6-strand) or modified Becker method (4-strand). The neurovascular structures were repaired under a microscope.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients (47 digits) were treated. According to the criteria of Moiemen and Elliot, the lacerated areas were in zones IA and IB in 7 and 40 digits, respectively. The mean ranges of motion were 149.27 ± 7.78 and 66.43 ± 2.04 degrees according to the Strickland and modified Strickland assessments, respectively. The mean 2-point discrimination was 5.00 ± 0.63 mm. Four patients (group 1) presented with injuries to 2 digits, and 9 (group 2) and 3 (group 3) patients had 3 and 4 injured digits, respectively. The outcomes were satisfactory in terms of the mean range of motion; 2-point discrimination; cold tolerance; visual analog scale pain score; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score; and grip strength. There were no differences among the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Open multiple-finger injuries involving flexor digitorum profundus rupture with concurrent neurovascular injuries on one or both sides occasionally occur in industrial environments. Fortunately, each digit exhibits a consistent injury type in a particular anatomical location; appropriate repair yields satisfactory outcomes despite the presence of multiple injuries.

The clinical effectiveness and safety of intravenous unfractionated heparin following digital replantation and revascularization: A narrative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Digital replants and revascularization (DRV) have been performed since the 1960s but there are no recognized standard peri-operative anticoagulation practices. A narrative systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and safety of therapeutic peri-operative unfractionated heparin following DRV was undertaken.

METHODS

A review of the literature from 1985 to March 2022 was conducted using Medline, Embase, CINAHL and EBM reviews. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) use following DRV was compared to low-molecular weight heparin, other anticoagulants or no anticoagulation. Randomized trials, observational studies as well as guidelines were selected and independently screened. The Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB 2) tool and ROBINS-I were used to appraise risk of bias.

RESULTS

While the search strategy identified 1490 references, only six studies met the inclusion criteria. Significant heterogeneity and the low methodological quality of the evidence precluded a meta-analysis. Among the four studies that documented the surgical success rate associated with the use of a therapeutic dose of UFH post DRV, only two reported improved clinical outcomes. Evidence of a higher complication rate related to UFH use was found in four studies. Low quality evidence suggests that a therapeutic dose of unfractionated heparin leads to a higher risk of complications when compared with heparin given as an intermittent bolus of unfractionated heparin or subcutaneous heparin, or prostaglandin E1 or no heparin.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that IV UFH use following DRV has no significant impact on the success of the intervention. Heparin use may not be innocuous as some studies showed increased bleeding complications.