Can Early Post-Operative Scoring of Non-Traumatic Amputees Decrease Rates of Revision Surgery?

Background and Objectives: Medical registries evolved from a basic epidemiological data set to further applications allowing deriving decision making. Revision rates after non-traumatic amputation are high and dramatically impact the following rehabilitation of the amputee. Risk scores for revision surgery after non-traumatic lower limb amputation are still missing. The main objective was to create an amputation registry allowing us to determine risk factors for revision surgery after non-traumatic lower-limb amputation and to develop a score for an early detection and decision-making tool for the therapeutic course of patients at risk for non-traumatic lower limb amputation and/or revision surgery. Materials and Methods: Retrospective data analysis was of patients with major amputations lower limbs in a four-year interval at a University Hospital of maximum care. Medical records of 164 patients analysed demographics, comorbidities, and amputation-related factors. Descriptive statistics analysed demographics, prevalence of amputation level and comorbidities of non-traumatic lower limb amputees with and without revision surgery. Correlation analysis identified parameters determining revision surgery. Results: In 4 years, 199 major amputations were performed; 88% were amputated for non-traumatic reasons. A total of 27% of the non-traumatic cohort needed revision surgery. Peripheral vascular disease (PVD) (72%), atherosclerosis (69%), diabetes (42%), arterial hypertension (38%), overweight (BMI > 25), initial gangrene (47%), sepsis (19%), age > 68.2 years and nicotine abuse (17%) were set as relevant within this study and given a non-traumatic amputation score. Correlation analysis revealed delayed wound healing (confidence interval: 64.1% (47.18%; 78.8%)), a hospital length of stay before amputation of longer than 32 days (confidence interval: 32.3 (23.2; 41.3)), and a BKA amputation level (confidence interval: 74.4% (58%; 87%)) as risk factors for revision surgery after non-traumatic amputation. A combined score including all parameters was drafted to identify non-traumatic amputees at risk for revision surgery. Conclusions: Our results describe novel scoring systems for risk assessment for non-traumatic amputations and for revision surgery at non-traumatic amputations. It may be used after further prospective evaluation as an early-warning system for amputated limbs at risk of revision.

In-house virtual surgical planning and guided mandibular reconstruction is less precise, but more economical and time-efficient than commercial procedures.

BACKGROUND: To compare an in-house and a commercially available surgical planning solution for mandibular reconstruction in terms of postoperative reconstruction accuracy and economic benefit. METHODS: Twenty-nine consecutive patients with advanced oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) requiring segmental mandibular reconstruction were enrolled. Fifteen patients underwent in-house surgical planning and 14 patients underwent a commercially available planning solution. A morphometric comparison of preoperative and postoperative computed tomography (CT) data sets and a cost-benefit comparison were performed. RESULTS: Volumes of planned and reconstructed bone segments differed significantly for both in-house planning (p = 0.0431) and commercial planning (p < 0.0001). Significant differences in osteotomy angles were demonstrated for in-house planning (p = 0.0391). Commercial planning was superior to in-house planning for total mandibular deviation (p = 0.0217), intersegmental space volumes (p = 0.0035), and lengths (p = 0.0007). No significant difference was found between the two planning solutions in terms of intersegmental ossification and the incidence of wound healing disorders. In-house planning took less time than commercial planning (p < 0.0001). Component manufacturing costs (p < 0.0001) and total cumulative costs (p < 0.0001) were significantly lower for in-house planning. CONCLUSIONS: In-house surgical planning is less accurate but has a cost advantage and could be performed in less time.