Functional and patient-reported outcomes following single digit replantation: A systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVES: Finger amputations can involve different levels of injury complexity, and the success of a finger replantation is further shaped by a variety of factors, including patient characteristics, surgical technique, and postoperative rehabilitation. These variables may interact in complex ways and contribute to heterogeneity that makes it challenging to guide management for individual patients. As such, this systematic review seeks review the outcomes of isolated single digit replantation and compare patient reported outcomes following revision amputation to guide decision making. METHODS: The United States National Library of Medicine (PubMed/Medline), EMBASE and CINAHL were systematically searched to identify publications relevant to this systematic review. Related articles that were published from database inception to October 15, 2022 were extracted. The inclusion criteria consisted of English language clinical trials and observational studies reporting any functional or patient-reported outcome following single digit replantation. RESULTS: From the initial 1050 titles and abstracts that were eligible for screening, six studies representing 550 single digit replantations were included. There were 162 replanted thumbs (162/550), as reported in three studies, and 388 replanted fingers (388/550), as reported in all six studies. Overall, all six studies concluded that non-thumb single digit replantation can provide satisfactory outcomes. Five studies suggested that single digit replantation proximal to flexor zone II can have reasonable outcomes in select cases. Two of the comparative studies (Zhu et al. [1], Chung et al. [2]) showed a statistically significant increase in MHQ score in the non-thumb replant group in comparison to the revision amputation group (87.6 versus 84.6 respectively). CONCLUSION: When technically feasible, replantation is recommended, even in select index finger zone II amputations. Single digit replantation does not restore pre-injury hand function but does result in acceptable hand function when successful. Further study is needed to better inform risk-stratification of patients, and guide patient, and surgeon expectations for post-operative recovery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Facial Transplantation in a Nationalized Health System: The Canadian Experience.

Facial transplantation (FT) is recognized as the ultimate reconstruction for severely disfigured patients. The substantial cost of these procedures in a nationalized health system has not been extensively published. The first Canadian FT performed in May 2018 was a great opportunity to address this subject and evaluate the viability of such a program. METHODS: A detailed patient chart review was performed and a cost per unit approach was used to estimate the procedure cost. The preoperative, operative, and the postoperative periods up to 1-year after the surgery were analyzed. Financial support from private sponsors and Hospital Fund donations were considered. The literature on international FT and national solid organ transplantation was reviewed. RESULTS: The overall 1-year cost was estimated at $440,224 (2018 CAD). The costs are explained by a long hospital length of stay, costly immunosuppressive therapy, and high immunosuppression-related complications. Those findings are consistent with international FT literature. The societal impact of the surgery was minimized with a $36,921 (2018 CAD) grant obtained from an external contributor. Interestingly, the hospital foundation sustained a 794% increase in donations ($1,787,148; 2019 CAD) the year following the surgery. CONCLUSION: Our experience confirmed that the combination of private funding, with positive goodwill and hospital donations, is a workable model for innovative surgery in the setting of a nationalized health system with financial restrictions.