Composite graft repair in distal finger injuries: emergency room or operating room?

BACKGROUND: Fingertip amputations are common injuries presenting to the emergency room. However, all amputations do not have a chance of replantation, and composite graft is among the salvage treatments in this case. This treatment is both easy to apply and economical. Our study compares the success and cost of composite grafting in the emergency and operating rooms. METHODS: Thirty-six patients who met the criteria were included in the study. The decision on the repair site was made by the sur-geon according to patient compliance and the intensity of the emergency clinic. Demographic and disease information of the patients were recorded. P<0.05 was accepted as the significance level. RESULTS: Twenty-two cases were pediatric patients. Eighteen cases of crush injuries and 22 cases were treated in the emergency room. There was no significant difference in terms of complications, need for additional intervention, and short fingers related to interventions performed in the emergency room and operating room. Interventions in the emergency department were significantly lower in cost and shorter hospitalization times. There was no significant difference in terms of patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Composite grafting is a simple and reliable method in fingertip injuries and gives satisfactory results in terms of patient satisfaction. In addition, composite graft application in fingertip injuries in the emergency department will both reduce the cost and prevent hospital infections that may occur due to the reduction in hospitalization.

A new custom-made plate preparation method for bony mallet finger treatment and a comparison with extension block technique.

OBJECTIVES: In this study, we aimed to describe a new hook plate technique (HPT) and to compare our results with the conventional extension block technique (EBT) with a Kirschner wire (K-wire) for bony mallet finger treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between April 2015 and January 2018, a total of 19 patients including 10 who were treated with EBT (7 males, 3 females; mean age: 30.1±7.3 years; range, 17 to 48 years) and nine who were treated with HPT (6 males, 3 females; mean age: 31.7±11.3 years; range, 19 to 42 years) for bony mallet finger with distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint subluxation and/or fracture fragment larger than one-third of distal phalanx (Wehbe-Schneider type 1/b, 2/a, 2/b, 3/a) joint were retrospectively analyzed. The DIP range of motion (ROM), Warren and Crawford scores, time to return to work/daily activity, operation time, the number of fluoroscopy shots, cost and complications were compared. RESULTS: No significant difference was found in the DIP ROM (p=0.708) and the Warren/Norris and Crawford scores (p=0.217 and p=0.175, respectively) between the two groups. Operation time and material cost were higher with HPT (p=0.006, p=0.001). There was no significant difference in the number of fluoroscopy shots (p=0.344). Although DIP joint motion was started at two weeks in the HPT group and at eight weeks in the EBT group, no significant difference was observed in the time of return to work and normal daily life in both groups (p=0.859). Complications were observed in two patients in the EBT group and in three patients in the HPT group. No significant difference in total complications was observed between the two groups (p=0.666). CONCLUSION: Bony mallet finger treatment with a custom-made hook plate prepared from 1.3-mm AO plates appeared to be clinically and radiologically similar to EBT. Additionally, HPT had the advantages of allowing early ROM to DIP joint and eliminating the need for a secondary surgery such as K-wire removal. On the other hand, hardware cost with HPT was higher than EBT.