Search

Background: Management of the severely injured lower limb in children remains a challenge despite advances in surgical techniques. Models that predict the risk of lower limb trauma patients are designed to provide an estimation of the probability of limb salvage. In this study, we validate Mangled Extremity Syndrome Index (Mangled Extremity Severity Score [MESS]) by measurement of its discrimination in children., Materials and Methods: From September 2009 to 2010, we collected the hospital records of all children who presented with lower extremity long bone open fractures. The inclusion criteria were I grade, II B, III C open fractures, severe injury to three of four organ systems, and severe injury to two of four organ systems with minor injury to two of four systems that require surgical interventions. Severity of limb injury was measured using MESS. Patients were followed up for 1 year. The discrimination of MESS model in differentiating of outcome in patients was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operator characteristic plot., Results: We evaluated 200 children referred consecutively to our center. The mean MESS in the amputation group was 7.5 ± 1.59 versus 6.4 ± 2.02 in the limb salvage group (p = 0.04). Amputation rate was 7.5% (n = 15). Percentages of skeletal/soft-tissue injury was different between groups (p = 0.0001). Children in the amputation group showed more tissue injury compared with limb salvage group. The best clinical discriminator power was calculated as MESS ≥ 6.5 (sensitivity = 73%, specificity = 54%)., Conclusion: We assumed that patients with a high risk of amputation can be identified early, and specific measures can be implemented immediately by using MESS with threshold of 6.5., (Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

The mangled extremity severity score (MESS) is a scoring system that can be applied to mangled extremities and help one determine which mangled limbs will eventually come to amputation. The MESS is a graduated grading system based on skeletal and soft tissue injury, shock, ischemia, and age. The records of 37 patients having sustained 43 open fractures or mangled upper extremity injuries, seen and treated at the University of New Mexico's Regional Trauma Center between April 1987 and September 1990, have been reviewed. All nine extremity injuries with a MESS of greater than or equal to seven were amputated, and 34 of 34 with a MESS of less than seven were salvaged. Nine Grade IIIC and six mangled extremities were identified in our study. Five of these Grade IIIC and four of the mangled extremities with a MESS of greater than or equal to seven were amputated. All Grade IIIC or mangled extremities with a MESS of less than seven were salvaged. In conclusion, the MESS is an early and accurate predictor for identifying the extremities that may be best treated by amputation.

Recent reports using the Mangled Extremity Severity Score (MESS) suggest that a score of > or = 7 is 100% accurate in predicting the need for amputation of severely injured lower extremities. To further evaluate the value of the MESS in predicting amputation, specifically with respect to type IIIB and type IIIC (Gustilo and Anderson) open fractures of the tibia, we retrospectively evaluated 24 patients with these injuries. A significant difference (p = 0.001) between MESS values of 13 salvaged (6.36 +/- 0.35 SEM) and 11 amputated limbs (6.36 +/- 0.54 SEM) was found. A MESS value of > or = 4 was most sensitive (100%); a MESS value of > or = 7 was most specific, and a MESS value of > or = 7 was found to have a positive predictive value of 100%. Subsequently, we addressed recent criticisms of the MESS by including nerve injury in the scoring system and by separating soft-tissue and skeletal injury components of the MESS. We modified the MESS with a score called the NISSSA and applied it retrospectively to our cases. After careful statistical comparison we found both the MESS and NISSSA to be highly accurate (p < 0.005) in predicting amputation. The NISSSA was found to be more sensitive (81.8% versus 63.6%) and more specific (92.3 versus 69.2%).

The Red Cross wound classification was applied to 63 casualties requiring surgery in the recent Gulf war. The majority of wounds affect only soft tissue, caused predominantly by antipersonnel fragments. Bullet wounds were fewer but tended to be more severe, often involving a fracture or vascular damage. We recommend minor modification to the classification to include scoring of significant neurological injury. Further, we feel that by recording the distribution of all wounds as well as scoring the casualty's two worst injuries, the incidence and pattern of multiple wounds are ascertained, which is useful in military surgical research. We believe that the Red Cross wound classification is valuable in assessing a wound as part of a secondary survey, but that this wound score has little part to play in triage. It may help to decide management of individual wounds in clinical practice and is useful for recording the nature of wounds for future analysis.