Dataset Information

Association Between Daytime vs Overnight Digit Replantation and Surgical Outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Recent evidence suggests that select delayed replantation may not adversely affect digit survival; however, whether surgical timing (overnight or daytime) is associated with digit replantation outcomes is unknown.

Objective

To assess whether digit survival, complication rate, and duration of surgery are associated with time of replantation.

Design, setting, and participants

This retrospective case series study included all replantations performed at a single tertiary referral academic center between January 1, 2000, and August 1, 2021. Data were analyzed between October 2, 2021, and January 1, 2022. Four daytime surgery intervals were selected based on literature review. Daytime replantations started within the intervals whereas overnight replantations began outside the intervals. For each case, the procedure difficulty score and the attending surgeon expertise score were calculated. Logistic and linear regressions adjusting for confounders including procedure difficulty score and expertise score were used to assess surgical timing and outcomes. Participants were adults (aged ≥18 years) undergoing digit replantations between January 2000 and August 2021 with at least 1-month follow-up. Replantation was defined as the reattachment of a completely amputated digit that necessitated anastomosis of both artery and vein.

Exposures

Daytime or overnight digit replantation.

Main outcomes and measures

Viable replanted digit at 1-month follow-up, number of complications, and duration of surgery.

Results

A total of 98 patients (mean [SD] age, 39.5 [15.3] years; 136 [93%] men) and 147 digits met inclusion criteria. Overall success rate was 55%. Between 4 pm and 7 am, overnight replantations were associated with 0.4 fewer complications (β, -0.4; 95% CI, -0.8 to -0.1) and 90.7 minutes shorter operative time (β, -90.7; 95% CI, -173.6 to -7.7). A 1-point increase in surgeon expertise score was associated with 1.7 times increased odds of replantation success for all intervals (adjusted odds ratio, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.4; P = .002). There were no differences in digit survival by surgical time.

Conclusions and relevance

In this case series study of digit replantations, time of operation was not associated with replantation success. Overnight replantation was associated with fewer complications and shorter duration of surgery compared with daytime surgery. Results of this study suggest that overnight replantations may be performed with outcomes comparable to daytime replantations at a tertiary care academic center.

SUBMITTER: Lin IF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9437749 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association Between Daytime vs Overnight Digit Replantation and Surgical Outcomes.

Lin I-Chun F IF Yoon Alfred P AP Kong Lingxuan L Wang Lu L Chung Kevin C KC

JAMA network open 20220901 9

<h4>Importance</h4>Recent evidence suggests that select delayed replantation may not adversely affect digit survival; however, whether surgical timing (overnight or daytime) is associated with digit replantation outcomes is unknown.<h4>Objective</h4>To assess whether digit survival, complication rate, and duration of surgery are associated with time of replantation.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This retrospective case series study included all replantations performed at a single tert ...[more]

PMID: 36048443

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceRisk-adjusted variation in surgeon outcomes has been traditionally explained by surgeon volume and hospital infrastructure, yet it is unclear how a surgeon's operative proficiency directly contributes to their patients' outcomes.ObjectiveTo assess the variation of surgeons' operative proficiency and investigate its association with surgical outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis case series was a retrospective analysis of all digit replantations and revascularizations at a single US university medical center between January 2000 and August 2020. Surgeons were assigned a proficiency score based on the expected procedure difficulty and outcomes from a sample of their cases. Surgeon proficiency scores were then used to determine associations with outcomes from subsequent cases. The expected difficulty of each case was calculated using a novel scoring system that applied pooled relative risks from a meta-analysis of risk factors for replantation and revascularization failure.ExposuresDigit replantation and revascularization.Main outcomes and measuresDigit survival at 1-month follow up (case success) and number of complications.ResultsA total of 145 patients and 226 digits were treated by 11 surgeons with training in hand or microsurgery (mean [SD] age, 41.9 [15.2] years; 204 [90%] men); there were 116 replantations and 110 revascularizations. Surgeon proficiency scores ranged from 1.3 to 5.7, with a mean (SD) of 3.4 (1.4). Case success rates among surgeons varied from 20.0% to 90.5%, with a mean (SD) of 64.9%. Higher proficiency scores were associated with fewer case failures: each point increase was associated with 40% decreased odds of failure (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.94). Every 3-point increase in proficiency score was associated with 1 less complication (effect estimate, -0.29; 95% CI, -0.56 to 0.02). Surgeon proficiency score had a greater association with case failure than surgeon volume (16.7% vs 12.0%). The final model's association with case failure had an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.93.Conclusions and relevanceOperative proficiency varied widely among practicing surgeons and accounted for 17% of estimative ability for success of digit replantation and revascularization. Greater surgeon proficiency was associated with better outcomes, indicating that the value of surgical care may be optimized by improving surgeon proficiency.

Project description:ImportanceOptimal treatment for traumatic digit amputation is unknown.ObjectiveTo compare long-term patient-reported and functional outcomes between patients treated with revision amputation or replantation for digit amputations.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study at 19 centers in the United States and Asia. Participants were 338 individuals 18 years or older with traumatic digit amputations with at least 1 year of follow-up after treatment. Participants were enrolled from August 1, 2016, to April 12, 2018.ExposuresRevision amputation or replantation of traumatic digit amputations.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) score. Secondary outcomes were the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) upper-extremity module scores and functional outcomes.ResultsAmong 338 patients who met all inclusion criteria, the mean (SD) age was 48.3 (16.4) years, and 85.0% were male. Adjusted aggregate comparison of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between patients with revision amputation and replantation revealed significantly better outcomes in the replantation cohort measured by the MHQ (5.93; 95% CI, 1.03-10.82; P = .02), DASH (-4.29; 95% CI, -8.45 to -0.12; P = .04), and PROMIS (3.44; 95% CI, 0.60 to 6.28; P = .02) scores. In subgroup analyses, DASH scores were significantly lower (6 vs 9, P = .05), indicating less disability and pain, and PROMIS scores higher (78 vs 75, P = .04) after replantation. Patients with 3 or more digits amputated (including thumb) had significantly better PROs after replantation than those managed with revision amputation (22 vs 42, P = .03 for DASH and 61 vs 36, P = .01 for PROMIS). Patients who underwent replantation after 3 or more digits amputated (excluding thumb) had higher MHQ scores, which did not reach statistical significance (69 vs 65, P = .06). Revision amputation in the subgroup with single-finger amputation distal to the proximal interphalangeal joint resulted in better 2-point discrimination (6 vs 8 mm, P = .05). Compared with revision amputation, replantation resulted in better 9-hole peg test times in the subgroup with 3 or more digits amputated (including thumb) (46 vs 81 seconds, P = .001), better Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test in the subgroup with 3 or more digits amputated (excluding thumb) (3 vs 21 g, P = .008), and better 3-point pinch test in the subgroup with 2 digits amputated (excluding thumb) (6.7 vs 5.6 kg, P = .03).Conclusions and relevanceWhen technically feasible, replantation is recommended in 3 or more digits amputated and in single-finger amputation (excluding thumb) distal to the proximal interphalangeal joint because it achieved better PROs, with long-term functional benefit. Thumb replantation is still recommended for its integral role in opposition.

Project description:ImportanceResident operative autonomy has been steadily decreasing. Whether this reduction in autonomy has been associated with changes in patient outcomes is unclear.ObjectiveTo assess whether surgical procedures performed by residents without an attending surgeon scrubbed are associated with differences in patient outcomes compared with procedures performed by attending surgeons alone or by residents with the assistance of attending surgeons.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study analyzed 30-day outcomes among patients who received operations at US Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers and were recorded within the VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP) database from July 1, 2004, to September 30, 2019. Among 1 797 056 operations recorded in the VASQIP during that period, 1 319 020 were eligible for inclusion. Operations performed by a surgical resident without an attending surgeon scrubbed (resident primary) were propensity score matched on a 1:1 ratio (based on year of procedure and patient age, race, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, functional status, emergency status, inpatient status, presence of multiple comorbidities, and Current Procedural Terminology code) to operations performed by an attending surgeon only (surgeon primary) and operations performed by a resident with assistance from an attending surgeon (resident plus surgeon).ExposuresLevel of resident involvement.Main outcomes and measuresThirty-day adjusted all-cause mortality.ResultsAmong 1 319 020 surgical procedures included, 138 750 were performed by residents only, 308 724 were performed by surgeons only, and 871 546 were performed by residents and surgeons. For the 1 319 020 total cases, patients' mean (SD) age was 61.6 (12.9) years; 1 223 051 patients (92.7%) were male; and 212 315 (16.1%) were Black or African American, 63 817 (4.9%) were Hispanic, 830 704 (63.0%) were White, and 212 814 (16.1%) were of other or unknown race and ethnicity. Propensity score matching produced 101 130 pairs of resident-primary and surgeon-primary procedures and 137 749 pairs of resident-primary and resident plus surgeon procedures. Patient all-cause mortality and morbidity were no different among those who received surgeon-primary procedures (mortality: odds ratio [OR], 1.03 [95% CI, 0.95-1.12]; morbidity: OR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.97-1.05]) vs resident plus surgeon procedures (mortality: OR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.97-1.11]; all-cause morbidity: OR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95-1.00]). Resident-primary procedures had longer operative times than surgeon-primary procedures (median, 80 minutes [IQR, 50-123 minutes] vs 70 minutes [IQR, 41-114 minutes], respectively; P < .001) but shorter operative times than resident plus surgeon procedures (median, 71 minutes [IQR, 43-113 minutes] vs 73 minutes [IQR, 45-115 minutes]; P < .001). Hospital length of stay was unchanged among resident-primary vs surgeon-primary procedures (median, 4 days [IQR, 2-10 days] vs 4 days [IQR, 2-9 days]; P = .08) and statistically significantly shorter than resident plus surgeon procedures (median, 4 days [IQR, 1-9 days] vs 4 days [IQR, 2-10 days]; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, surgical procedures performed by residents alone were not associated with any changes in all-cause mortality or composite morbidity compared with those performed by attending surgeons alone or by residents with the assistance of attending surgeons. Given these findings and the importance of operative autonomy to prepare surgical residents for independent practice, efforts to increase autonomy are both safe and needed.

Dataset Information

Association Between Daytime vs Overnight Digit Replantation and Surgical Outcomes.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Association Between Daytime vs Overnight Digit Replantation and Surgical Outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets