Search

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of patientsundergoing upper extremity amputation (UEA) for diabetic hand gangrene with aspecial focus on mortality and to determine the risk factors for thedevelopment of hand gangrene in diabetic patients. METHODS The medical records of patients who underwent lower extremity amputation (LEA) or UEA because of diabetic gangrene between January 2005 and December 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were then assigned to one of two groups: the UEA group (n = 15, 9 male; mean age = 62 ± 12.4) and the LEA group (n = 280, 196 male; mean age = 64.6 ± 10.9). A Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to compare the five-year survival rates between the two groups. A multivariable logistic analysis including demographic characteristics, laboratory data, and dialysis status was conducted to identify the risk factors for diabetic hand gangrene. RESULTS The five-year mortality rate in the UEA group (86.7%, 13 of 15 patients) was significantly higher than that in the LEA group (51.8%, 145 of 280 patients, P < 0.001). Dialysis status was determined as a risk factor associated with the development of diabetic hand gangrene (OR, 4.05; 95% CI, 1.23-13.29; P = 0.021). CONCLUSION Evidence from this study has revealed that that amputation for diabetichand gangrene is associated with a high rate of mortality. Among diabeticpatients, the five-year survival rate of patients who underwent amputation fordiabetic hand gangrene was only 13.3%. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level IV, Prognostic Study.

Study Design Pretest/posttest case series design. Introduction Rates of prosthetic device abandonment are highest among persons with upper extremity (UE) amputation. Modified Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy (mCIMT), which has been extensively studied in patients with chronic, subacute, and acute stroke, is an under-utilized approach to treat persons with UE amputation. Purpose of the Study To present an mCIMT intervention for prosthetic device training after a unilateral UE amputation. Methods The two cases from an advanced rehabilitation center herein described followed a standard UE amputation rehabilitation program used in conjunction with a home training program using mCIMT 3 hours a day, 5 days a week, for 3 weeks. Progress was evaluated weekly using the Activities Measure for Upper Limb Amputees (AM-ULA); Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand; Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales-Revised. Results Both the cases exhibited an increase in observable and objective functional use with a UE prosthetic device, as indicated by the AM-ULA. Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first description of mCIMT as part of a unilateral UE amputee rehabilitation program. The AM-ULA results show meaningful change, whereas Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales-Revised show mixed results.

Symptomatic neuromas of the upper extremity often cause persistent, debilitating pain that is resistant to medical management. Following upper extremity amputation, painful neuromas may disrupt rehabilitation efforts and pose a barrier to prosthetic use. Several surgical approaches have been attempted to treat neuromas, each of which suffers from limitations. We have developed a novel technique, the vascularized, denervated muscle target, that offers a compelling new option for primary prevention and secondary treatment of symptomatic neuromas of the upper extremity. Here, we provide a detailed description of our surgical technique as it is applied to neuromas of the upper extremity.

Non-traumatic upper extremity amputations are an increasing concern with the rising prevalence of diabetes mellitus. To ascertain the risk factors and mortality rates for these amputations, the demographic information, amputation history, comorbidities and clinical outcomes of 140 patients who underwent non-traumatic upper extremity amputations between 1 January 2004 and 31 October 2017 were studied. Correlations were assessed using Cochran-Armitage chi-squared tests, odds ratios and multivariate binomial logistic regression as appropriate. Diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, end-stage renal failure, peripheral arterial disease and prior lower extremity amputation were significant risk factors for multiple upper extremity amputations. One-year, 2-year and 5-year mortality rates were 12%, 15% and 38%, respectively, following first upper extremity amputation. The risk factors for upper extremity amputations correspond with those for lower extremity amputations, comprising mainly diabetes mellitus and its related comorbidities. The mortality rates for non-traumatic upper extremity amputations highlight their significant burden on patients. Level of evidence: III

Learning objectives After reading this article, participant should be able to: 1. Describe the technique of replantation for very distal amputation of the digit and salvage procedures for venous drainage. 2. Perform single-digit replantation after viewing the videos. 3. Recognize appropriate cases for joint salvage techniques in periarticular amputation at each joint of the digit and wrist. 4. Outline the methods of flexor and extensor tendon reconstruction in an avulsed amputation of the digit or thumb. 5. Understand the order of digital replantation and transpositional replantation for a restoration of pinch or grip in multiple-digit amputation. Summary This article provides practical tips and caveats for the latest replantation surgical techniques for digit, hand, and upper extremity amputation. Four videos, clinical photographs, and drawings highlight important points of operative technique and outcomes of replantation.

Background: Hand and distal forearm allotransplantation has advanced over the last 20 years from experimental to a viable treatment option for bilateral upper extremity amputation. Despite widespread growth of this field, there are few technical reports that elaborate the details of donor arm procurement. This article details a technique for rapid donor procurement through the elbow for mid to distal forearm-level hand allograft procurement. Methods: Nine arm procurements were performed on deceased tissue-only donors provided by the local organ procurement organization, including two bilateral and five unilateral cases. Technique highlights include using a fishmouth incision through the lateral and medical epicondyles, identification of the neurovascular structures, and disarticulating the elbow joint. Results: Procuring through the elbow provides straightforward anatomy, bypasses the need to cut through bone, and allows tissue allotransplantation teams to achieve procurement, flushing, and packaging within 20 minutes. Conclusions: Procurement through the elbow is a simple procedure that streamlines the process for multi-organ donors by minimizing the time needed for hand allograft procurement. Team coordination and surgical rehearsals are essential for successful hand and upper extremity procurement and allotransplantation.

Upper extremity amputations are rated in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, Section 15.6, Amputation Impairment, where text, tables, and figures guide evaluators in combining proximal diagnosis-based impairments (DBIs) and proximal range-of-motion impairments. The AMA Guides provides impairment grids for lower and upper extremity amputations, which are divided into five impairment classes (0 through 4), and each impairment class is further divided (except class 0) into five grades (A through E), each with its respective impairment rating that is expressed as a percentage of the extremity. Determining impairment class, and thus the default value of impairment, is straightforward if the amputation occurred directly at one of the points in the relevant grid; if the amputation occurred at another point, the evaluator should consult the appropriate figure to assess how the specific level of amputation corresponds with impairment percentages. An individual's proximal problems may lead to an increase in the impairment value because of the application of grade modifiers. Except in rare instances of bilateral upper extremity amputation or when the patient is unable to wear a prosthesis for a lower extremity amputation, the evaluator usually uses the default rating value within the selected impairment class as the final percentage rating. Evaluators are advised to re-read the amputation section in the AMA Guides before conducting an amputation evaluation.

Traumatic amputations are partial or complete dismemberment of part of the human body (usually one limb) due to an injury that involves a component of blunt force trauma. It is usually caused by accidental events and only very rarely due to suicidal events. A 37-year-old female with major depressive disorder attempted suicide by placing her forearms on a railroad track, resulting in traumatic bilateral upper extremity amputations. Emergency Department resuscitation was initiated as the patient was taken immediately to the operating room; however, restoration of the limbs was unfeasible, and the patient had successful debriding and fashioning a flap to the distal ends of the upper extremities after hemostasis was achieved. Depression may still be an undertreated clinical entity in our society, and many preventable causes of suicide are attempted each year. Evidence exists that suggests severe suicide attempts occur generally in men and minor suicide attempts, or so-called suicidal gestures, occur generally in women. This case questions this notion.

This study aimed to understand the current utilization of surgical approaches for nerve ending management in upper extremity amputation to prevent and treat nerve-related pain. We administered a survey to 190 of 1270 surgeons contacted by email (15% response rate) and analyzed their demographics, practice patterns, and perceptions regarding techniques for nerve ending management in upper extremity amputees. Although many surgical techniques were employed, most surgeons (54%) performed traction neurectomy during amputation and, alternatively, bury nerve into muscle if a neuroma subsequently develops (52%). Surgeons in practice less than 10 years were more likely to perform targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) and regenerative peripheral nerve interfaces (RPNI) than surgeons in practice greater than 10 years (p0.001). TMR and RPNI were performed more frequently for proximal amputations than distal amputations, but there is no consensus regarding the optimal timing to utilize these techniques. Surgeons commonly cited improved prosthetic control, pain, and phantom limb symptoms as reasons for performing TMR and RPNI. Increased physician compensation as a consideration was more commonly cited among TMR non-adopter than adopters (31% vs 14%, p=0.008). There is no consensus regarding techniques for the prevention or treatment of nerve ending pain in upper extremity amputees. TMR and RPNI are being utilized with increasing frequency and both patient and surgeon factors affect implementation in clinical practice.

Background Active treatment (targeted muscle reinnervation [TMR] or regenerative peripheral nerve interfaces [RPNIs]) of the amputated nerve ends has gained momentum to mitigate neuropathic pain following amputation. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the predictors for the development of neuropathic pain after major upper extremity amputation. Methods Retrospectively, 142 adult patients who underwent 148 amputations of the upper extremity between 2000 and 2019 were identified through medical chart review. All upper extremity amputations proximal to the metacarpophalangeal joints were included. Patients with a follow-up of less than 6 months and those who underwent TMR or RPNI at the time of amputation were excluded. Neuropathic pain was defined as phantom limb pain or a symptomatic neuroma reported in the medical charts at 6 months postoperatively. Most common indications for amputation were oncology (n = 53, 37%) and trauma (n = 45, 32%), with transhumeral amputations (n = 44, 30%) and shoulder amputations (n = 37, 25%) being the most prevalent. Results Neuropathic pain occurred in 42% of patients, of which 48 (32%) had phantom limb pain, 8 (5.4%) had a symptomatic neuroma, and 6 (4.1%) had a combination of both. In multivariable analysis, traumatic amputations (odds ratio [OR]: 4.1, p = 0.015), transhumeral amputations (OR: 3.9, p = 0.024), and forequarter amputations (OR: 8.4, p = 0.003) were independently associated with the development of neuropathic pain. Conclusion In patients with an upper extremity amputation proximal to the elbow or for trauma, there is an increased risk of developing neuropathic pain. In these patients, primary TMR/RPNI should be considered and this warrants a multidisciplinary approach involving general trauma surgeons, orthopaedic surgeons, plastic surgeons, and vascular surgeons.

Targeted muscle reinnervation after upper-extremity amputation has demonstrated improved outcomes with myoelectric prosthesis function and postoperative neuropathic pain. This technique has been established in the setting of shoulder disarticulation as well as transhumeral and transradial amputations, but a detailed technique of targeted muscle reinnervation with free tissue transfer from the volar forearm after forequarter amputation has not yet been described. Here, we describe a technique using a volar forearm filet flap to achieve simultaneously satisfactory soft tissue coverage after resection of a tumor from the chest wall and targeted muscle reinnervation of the brachial plexus.

Introduction Electrical injuries represent 0.4–3.2% of admissions to burn units and are responsible for >500 deaths per year in the United States. Approximately half occur in the workplace and are the fourth leading cause of work-related-traumatic death. The extent of injury can be drastically underestimated by total body surface area percentage (TBSA). Along with cutaneous burns, high voltage electrical injuries can lead to necrosis of muscle, bone, nervous tissue, and blood vessels. Aggressive management allows for patient survival, but at significant cost. Newer technologic advances help improve functional outcomes. Methods This case-report was conducted via retrospective chart review of the case presented. Results A 43-year-old male sustained a HVEI (>10, 000 V) after contacting an active wire while working as a linesman for an electric company. He presented after less than 15-minute transport from an outside hospital with full thickness burns and auto-amputation to all fingers on both hands and the distal third of the left hand (Images 1 and 2). There were full thickness circumferential burns to the entire left and right upper extremities with contractures, with the burns extending into the axilla, and chest wall musculature. The patient had 4th degree burns and a large wound to the left shoulder with posterior extension to the scapula, flank and back with approximately 25% TBSA (Image 3). Compartments were tense in both upper extremities. Patient was sedated and intubated to protect the airway and placed on mechanical ventilation. A femoral central line was then placed, and the patient was given pain control, continued fluid resuscitation, and blood products. Dark red colored urine from a foley catheter that was immediately identified as rhabdomyolysis induced myoglobinuria. Labs drawn demonstrated elevated troponin I, CK >40,000. BUN 18, creatinine 1.0, K+ 5.2 and phosphate 5.6. Decision was made immediately for operative intervention with emergent amputation of both upper extremities in the light of rhabdomyolysis secondary to tissue necrosis and oliguria. During the patient’s hospital course, he underwent multiple operations for further debridement with vacuum-assisted closure therapy and skin grafting of sites, as well as targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) 6 months later at an outside hospital. Conclusions Although HVEI only account for a small percentage of burn admissions, they are associated with greater morbidity than low-voltage injuries. Patients with HVEI often incur multiple injuries, more surgical procedures, have higher rates of complications, and more long term psychological and rehabilitative difficulties. Despite the need for amputation in some of these critically ill patients, options exist that allow for them to obtain long term functional success.

Purpose Level-I trauma centers are required to provide hand and microsurgery capability at all times. We examined transfers to our center to better understand distant patient referrals and, indirectly, study referrals in our region. Methods Records were reviewed from 2010 to 2015 to evaluate patients transferred to our level-I institution for upper extremity amputation. Patients were referred from 6 states to our institution over this period. We measured the straight-line distance from each patient's transferring facility to our facility and compared this distance with the straight-line distances from the zip code of the transferring facility to the zip code of each level-I trauma center. Results We had data for 250 transferred patients (91% male, 9% female). For 110 patients (44%), our hospital was the nearest level-I trauma center; however, for the remaining 140 patients (56%), other level-I trauma facilities were located closer to the referring hospital. Among these 140 patients, the mean distance of the referring facility to the nearest level-I trauma center (30 miles; SD, 27) was significantly different from the mean distance of the referring facility to our facility (71 miles; SD, 60). A median of 4 (range, 1–10) level-I trauma centers were bypassed before patients arrived at our center. Medicaid and "self-pay" patients were more likely to be transferred to our facility. Conclusions Fifty-six percent of patients transferred to our hospital for upper extremity amputation had a level-I trauma center closer to their injury. Patients with upper extremity amputation are referred to our regional center despite the proximity of closer level-I trauma centers. This suggests that regional microsurgery expertise does not correlate with level-I trauma designation, and establishment of designated microsurgery centers and formal referral guidelines may be beneficial for management of these difficult injuries. Clinical relevance We believe that this study further supports the need for formal designation of regional centers of expertise for microsurgical hand trauma.

Purpose Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) is a technique for the management of peripheral nerves in amputation. Phantom limb pain (PLP) and residual limb pain (RLP) trouble many patients after amputation, and TMR has been shown to reduce this pain when performed after the initial amputation. We hypothesize that TMR at the time of amputation may improve pain for patients after major upper-extremity amputation. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent major upper-extremity amputation with TMR performed at the time of the index amputation (early TMR). Phantom limb pain and RLP intensity and associated symptoms were assessed using the numeric rating scale (NRS), the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity Short-Form 3a, the Pain Behavior Short-Form 7a, and the Pain Interference Short-Form 8a. The TMR cohort was compared with benchmarked data from a sample of upper-extremity amputees. Results Sixteen patients underwent early TMR and were compared with 55 benchmark patients. More than half of early TMR patients were without PLP (62%) compared with 24% of controls. Furthermore, half of all patients were free of RLP compared with 36% of controls. The median PROMIS PLP intensity score for the general sample was 47 versus 38 in the early TMR sample. Patients who underwent early TMR reported reduced pain behaviors and interference specific to PLP (50 vs 53 and 41 vs 50, respectively). The PROMIS RLP intensity score was lower in patients with early TMR (36 vs 47). Conclusions This study demonstrates that early TMR is a promising strategy for treating pain and improving the quality of life in the upper-extremity amputee. Early TMR may preclude the need for additional surgery and represents an important technique for peripheral nerve surgery. Type of study/level of evidence Therapeutic IV.

In Japan, microsurgical skill development and a system to transfer patients to an appropriate hospital for upper extremity amputation have been promoted; however, information about trends of replantation is limited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to clarify the trends in the treatment for upper extremity amputation using the Japan Trauma Data Bank (JTDB).Data derived from JTDB (2004-2015) were used to quantify trends in the volume of replantation for upper extremity amputation including finger amputation. Trauma was diagnosed based on the Abbreviated Injury Scale code; a subgroup of patients who underwent replantation was delineated. We investigated patient demographics, infection rate, and characteristics of treating facilities.A total of 1240 patients underwent upper extremity amputation. Among these, 510 (41.1%) underwent replantation, and the rate of replantation did not change over the study period. The average age of patients who underwent or did not undergo replantation was 45.5 and 47.2 years, respectively. The proportion of the patients who were transferred to another hospital for treatment significantly decreased between 2004 (28.5%) and 2015 (16.3%) (P 0.01). Time taken for transfer from the accident site to hospitals increased. The rate of patients who underwent replantation differed among different hospitals; however, higher-volume hospitals were more likely to perform replantation.The rate of patients transferred to another hospital decreased between 2004 and 2015; however, the rate of patients who underwent replantation remained unchanged. This suggests that the number of patients who were transported directly from the accident site to an appropriate hospital has increased, whereas the indication for care in each hospital remains unchanged. Common criteria for amputations are needed to address the differing rates of replantation among hospitals.

Five participants with unilateral, upper extremity amputation were recruited from a convenience sample and participated in a supervised resistance training exercise program in their own local exercise facility using the Carter Cuff (Carter Medical Devices, LLC). The Carter Cuff is a relatively new assistive device that allows people with unilateral, upper extremity amputation and other disabilities or injuries of the hand to engage in resistance training exercises. Following a six weeks training period, an online survey was made available to the participants who provided demographic information and answered questions about their exercise habits and their satisfaction with the ease of use and effectiveness of the Carter Cuff as well as its impact on their lives. The results of the survey provided preliminary support for the effectiveness of the Carter Cuff and its positive effects on people with amputations. Though more quantitative data on physiological and psychological measures are needed, these preliminary findings have important implications for occupational therapy practice.

Upper extremity amputation is associated with significant disability. Elbow arthrodesis (EA) is a rarely indicated salvage procedure with a narrow set of indications. The purpose of this case series is to describe the clinical course of those patients undergoing an EA following severe combat-related, upper extremity trauma.5 patients treated for combat-related upper extremity injuries treated with an EA between 2003 and 2012 were identified. Demographic information, injury characteristics, and treatment course were evaluated.5 male patients with a mean age of 23.8 years were treated with an EA in relative extension following severe upper extremity trauma. 3 patients undergoing EA had concomitant bilateral above-knee amputations and 2 patients underwent fusion of their dominant arm. Successful arthrodesis was achieved in all patients. All patients reported good pain control without evidence of deep infection, the mean time from injury to arthrodesis was 305 days, and the mean time to arthrodesis was 714 days. The mean fusion angle among these patients was 138°.EA following severe combat-related, upper extremity trauma is a viable treatment option. In the multiply injured patient, arthrodesis in a position of extension may be advantageous to accommodate transfers and mobility.

Replantations for major amputations of upper extremity have been widely performed. We report a unique case of successful replantation of scapulothoracic avulsion amputation in a child. In this manuscript, we discuss the various challenges faced during the procedure and chances of neural recovery.

Replantation of a traumatic upper extremity amputation is a complex process accompanied by prolonged hospitalization, extended rehabilitation, and potential for graft failure secondary to poor perfusion to the distal extremity. The patient is faced with repeat visits to the operating room in addition to severe acute and chronic pain issues. We present the case of an 18-year-old male treated with prolonged continuous peripheral nerve blockade following traumatic left mid-humeral amputation and subsequent replantation. The patient maintained infraclavicular brachial plexus catheterization until hospital discharge, a course spanning 33 days and six follow-up surgical procedures. The patient was pain free and had been weaned off all opioids at a 4-week outpatient surgical debridement. Prolonged continuous infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade following replantation surgery has numerous potential benefits including augmentation of perfusion to the injured extremity, management of severe acute post-traumatic pain, and prevention of the chronic pain associated with transected nerves.

The hand and arm are exceptionally dexterous, exquisitely sensitive, and proficient in performing tasks and functions. Given the invaluable functions of the upper extremity in daily life, replacement of a missing limb through prosthetic substitution is challenging. Prosthetic and rehabilitation needs of injured Service members from recent military conflicts have brought upper extremity amputation to the forefront, which has led to an increase in attention and resource allocation. This article provides an overview of the care of the upper extremity amputee including surgical considerations, prosthetic design and fitting, and preprosthetic and post-prosthetic rehabilitation considerations.

Background: Despite advances in prosthetic development and neurorehabilitation, individuals with upper extremity (UE) loss continue to face functional and psychosocial challenges following amputation. Recent advanced myoelectric prostheses offer intuitive control over multiple, simultaneous degrees of motion and promise sensory feedback integration, but require complex training to effectively manipulate. We explored whether a virtual reality simulator could be used to teach dexterous prosthetic control paradigms to individuals with UE loss. Methods: Thirteen active-duty military personnel with UE loss (14 limbs) completed twenty, 30-min passive motor training sessions over 1–2 months. Participants were asked to follow the motions of a virtual avatar using residual and phantom limbs, and electrical activity from the residual limb was recorded using surface electromyography. Eight participants (nine limbs), also completed twenty, 30-min active motor training sessions. Participants controlled a virtual avatar through three motion sets of increasing complexity (Basic, Advanced, and Digit) and were scored on how accurately they performed requested motions. Score trajectory was assessed as a function of time using longitudinal mixed effects linear regression. Results: Mean classification accuracy for passive motor training was 43.8 ± 10.7% (14 limbs, 277 passive sessions). In active motor sessions, >95% classification accuracy (which we used as the threshold for prosthetic acceptance) was achieved by all participants for Basic sets and by 50% of participants in Advanced and Digit sets. Significant improvement in active motor scores over time was observed in Basic and Advanced sets (per additional session: β-coefficient 0.125, p = 0.022; β-coefficient 0.45, p = 0.001, respectively), and trended toward significance for Digit sets (β-coefficient 0.594, p = 0.077). Conclusions: These results offer robust evidence that a virtual reality training platform can be used to quickly and efficiently train individuals with UE loss to operate advanced prosthetic control paradigms. Participants can be trained to generate muscle contraction patterns in residual limbs that are interpreted with high accuracy by computer software as distinct active motion commands. These results support the potential viability of advanced myoelectric prostheses relying on pattern recognition feedback or similar controls systems.

Background: Phantom limb pain (PLP) is commonly seen following upper extremity (UE) amputation. Use of both mirror therapy, which utilizes limb reflection in a mirror, and virtual reality therapy, which utilizes computer limb simulation, has been used to relieve PLP. We explored whether the Virtual Integration Environment (VIE), a virtual reality UE simulator, could be used as a therapy device to effectively treat PLP in individuals with UE amputation. Methods: Participants with UE amputation and PLP were recruited at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (WRNMMC) and instructed to follow the limb movements of a virtual avatar within the VIE system across a series of study sessions. At the end of each session, participants drove virtual avatar limb movements during a period of "free-play" utilizing surface electromyography recordings collected from their residual limbs. PLP and phantom limb sensations were assessed at baseline and following each session using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), respectively. In addition, both measures were used to assess residual limb pain (RLP) at baseline and at each study session. In total, 14 male, active duty military personnel were recruited for the study. Results: Of the 14 individuals recruited to the study, nine reported PLP at the time of screening. Eight of these individuals completed the study, while one withdrew after three sessions and thus is not included in the final analysis. Five of these eight individuals noted RLP at baseline. Participants completed an average of 18, 30-min sessions with the VIE leading to a significant reduction in PLP in seven of the eight (88%) affected limbs and a reduction in RLP in four of the five (80%) affected limbs. The same user reported an increase in PLP and RLP across sessions. All participants who denied RLP at baseline (n = 3) continued to deny RLP at each study session. Conclusions: Success with the VIE system confirms its application as a non-invasive and low-cost therapy option for PLP and phantom limb symptoms for individuals with upper limb loss.

Upper extremity amputations are most frequently indicated by severe traumatic injuries. The location of the injury will determine the level of amputation. Preservation of extremity length is often a goal. The amputation site will have important implications on the functional status of the patient and options for prosthetic reconstruction. Advances in amputation techniques and prosthetic reconstructions promote improved quality of life. In this article, the authors review the principles of upper extremity amputation, including techniques, amputation sites, and prosthetic reconstructions.

Advances in motor vehicle safety, trauma care, combat body armor, and cancer treatment have enhanced the life expectancy and functional expectations of patients with upper-extremity amputations. Upper-extremity surgeons have multiple surgical options to optimize the potential of emerging prosthetic technologies for this diverse patient group. Targeted muscle reinnervation is an evolving technique that improves control of myoelectric prostheses and can prevent or treat symptomatic neuromas. This review addresses current strategies for the care of patients with amputations proximal to the wrist with an emphasis on recent advancements in surgical techniques and prostheses.

OBJECTIVES:: Much attention has been given to lower extremity amputations that occur more than 90 days after injury but little focus has been given to analogous upper extremity amputations. The purpose of this study was to determine the reason(s) for desired amputation and the common complications after amputation for those combat-wounded Servicemembers who underwent late upper extremity amputation. DESIGN:: Retrospective case series SETTING:: Tertiary trauma center PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS:: All U.S. Servicemembers who sustained major extremity amputations from September 2001- July 2011 were analyzed. INTERVENTION:: Late (90+ days after injury), upper extremity amputations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS:: Amputation level(s), time to amputation, age, number of operations, pre/post-operative complications, reason(s) for desiring amputation and disability outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS:: 7 of 218 (3.2%) upper extremity amputees had a late upper extremity amputation (>90 days from injury to amputation). The mean and median number of days from injury to amputation was 689 and 678, respectively. The most common pre-amputation complications were loss of wrist or finger motion (7, 100%), neurogenic pain (4, 57%) and heterotopic ossification (4, 57%). Three (43%) patients (two persistent, one new onset) had neurogenic pain and 2 (29%) had heterotopic ossification after amputation. Only 57% (4 out of 7) of amputees used their prostheses regularly. CONCLUSION:: Servicemembers undergoing late upper extremity amputation appear to have different pre and post-operative complications than those patients undergoing late lower extremity amputations. It was common for the amputee to not wear their prostheses and to experience similar complications after amputation, albeit in a less severe form. Language: en

Although significantly less common than vascular insufficiency in the lower extremities, heart, or brain, processes leading to inadequate vascular flow in the upper extremity carry significant morbidity. Our hands are our highly technical and extremely skilled terminal devices and arguably what make us uniquely human. Therefore when faced with situations of hand loss, every attempt should be made to preserve as much length and function as possible. Amputation is a procedure of last resort and is indicated only after limb salvage options have failed. The functional consequence of any particular amputation is the primary. Advances in reconstructive surgery and prosthetic devices hold hope and promise improved function for the upper limb amputee.

After major upper extremity traumatic amputation, replantation is attempted based upon the assumption that outcomes for a replanted limb exceed those for revision amputation with prosthetic rehabilitation. While some reports have examined functional differences between these patients, it is increasingly apparent that patient perceptions are also critical determinants of success. Currently, little patient-reported outcomes data exists to support surgical decision-making in the setting of major upper extremity traumatic amputation. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to directly compare patient-reported outcomes after replantation versus prosthetic rehabilitation.At three tertiary care centers, patients with a history of traumatic unilateral upper extremity amputation at or between the radiocarpal and elbow joints were identified. Patients who underwent either successful replantation or revision amputation with prosthetic rehabilitation were contacted. Patient-reported health status was evaluated with both DASH and MHQ instruments. Intergroup comparisons were performed for aggregate DASH score, aggregate MHQ score on the injured side, and each MHQ domain.Nine patients with successful replantation and 22 amputees who underwent prosthetic rehabilitation were enrolled. Aggregate MHQ score for the affected extremity was significantly higher for the Replantation group compared to the Prosthetic Rehabilitation group (47.2 vs. 35.1, p0.05). Among the MHQ domains, significant advantages to replantation were demonstrated with respect to overall function (41.1 vs. 19.7, p=0.03), ADLs (28.3 vs. 6.0, p=0.03), and patient satisfaction (46.0 vs. 24.4, p=0.03). Additionally, Replantation patients had a lower mean DASH score (24.6 vs. 39.8, p=0.08).Patients in this study who experienced major upper extremity traumatic amputation reported more favorable patient-reported outcomes after successful replantation compared to revision amputation with prosthetic rehabilitation.

Die Handtransplantation hat sich in den letzten Jahren an wenigen internationalen Zentren für ausgesuchte Indikationen nach posttraumatischer Amputation etabliert. Im Vergleich zu soliden Organen ist die Transplantation von Händen immunologisch noch komplizierter, da es sich um komplexe Gewebesysteme mit verschiedener Antigenität handelt. Dies hat zur Folge, dass die Patienten lebenslang immunsupprimiert werden müssen, obwohl es sich um die Transplantation eines nicht vital notwendigen Organes handelt. Die Minimierung der immunsuppressiven Therapie stellt eine der größten Herausforderungen auf dem Gebiet der Transplantationsmedizin dar. Das dafür erforderliche Verständnis der molekularen Abläufe ist Gegenstand intensiver Forschung im Bereich der sogenannten «composite tissue» Allotransplantationen (CTA). Weltweit sind seit 1998 bei 51 registrierten Patienten 72 Hände transplantiert worden, wovon bei 21 Patienten beide Hände und in einem Fall beide Oberarme erfolgreich transplantiert werden konnten.

The osseointegration programme for upper extremity amputation started in Sweden in 1990, when a titanium fixture was first implanted into a thumb. This method has since been used for transhumeral and below-elbow amputation. The treatment involves two surgical procedures. During the first a titanium fixture is surgically attached to the skeleton, and a second procedure six months later involves a skin penetrating abutment to which the prosthesis is attached.To describe the osseointegration procedure for surgery, prosthetics and rehabilitation.Patients with short stumps and previous problems with prosthetic fitting were selected. From 1990 to April 2010, 37 upper limb cases were treated and fitted with prosthesis: 10 thumbs, 1 partial hand, 10 transradial and 16 transhumeral amputations. Of these, 7 patients are currently not prosthetic users.Patients indicated that function and quality of life had improved since osseointegration.Osseointegration is an important platform for present and future prosthetic technology. The prosthetic situation is improved due to the stable fixation, freedom of motion and functionality.The two-stage osseointegration procedure has the potential to change the rehabilitation strategy for selected upper limb amputees. The method eliminates the need for a socket and the prosthesis will always fit. The stable prosthetic fixation and increased freedom of motion generates improved function. Specially designed components and rehabilitation procedures have been developed.

Nach traumatischer Amputation distal des Ellenbogens gilt es bereits bei der Erstversorgung, die operativen Rekonstruktionsmoglichkeiten zu berucksichtigen. Sie bedarf der gleichen Sorgfalt in Planung und Durchfuhrung wie die Replantation und sollte in jeder chirurgischen Abteilung moglich sein. Ziel ist es, einen belastungsstabilen, sensiblen und funktionell moglichst vielseitig einsetzbaren Stumpf zu schaffen. Aufgrund der starken Exposition der Hande ist auch der kosmetische Aspekt von groser Bedeutung. Bei der Rekonstruktion nach komplexeren Verletzungen ist jedoch, angesichts der erforderlichen Erfahrung und der vielschichtigen Probleme auf unterschiedlichen Fachgebieten, die Verlegung in ein entsprechend spezialisiertes Zentrum zu empfehlen. Dort ist die enge Zusammenarbeit von Unfallchirurgie/Orthopadie, Hand- und plastisch-rekonstruktiver (Mikro-)Chirurgie sowie Therapeuten und Orthopadietechnikern in idealer Weise gegeben, was ein moglichst optimales Behandlungsergebnis erreichen lasst.

This study investigated differences in adaptation to a novel dynamic environment between eight trans-radial upper extremity (UE) prosthetic users and eight naive, neurologically intact subjects. Participants held onto the handle of a robotic manipulandum and executed reaching movements within a horizontal plane following a pseudo-random sequence of targets. Curl field perturbations were imposed by the robot motors, and we compared the rate and quality of adaptation between the prosthetic and control subjects. Adaptation was quantitatively assessed by peak error, defined as the maximum orthogonal distance between an observed trajectory and an ideal straight trajectory. Initial exposure to the curl field resulted in large errors, and as the subjects adapted to the novel environment, the errors decreased. During the early phase of adaptation, group differences in the rate of motor adaptation were not significant. However, during late learning, both error magnitude and variability were larger in the prosthetic group. The quality of adaptation, as indicated by the magnitude of the aftereffects, was similar between groups. We conclude that in persons with trans-radial arm amputation, motor adaptation to curl fields during reaching is similar to unimpaired individuals. These findings are discussed in relation to mechanisms of motor adaptation, neural plasticity following an upper extremity amputation (UEA), and potential motor recovery therapies for prosthetic users.

Background Short upper extremity amputation stumps are difficult to fit with an appropriate-level prosthesis. Fitting at a more proximal level generally results in decreased function. Options in the past have included stump and prosthetic modification, both of which provide limited improvement in function. Anecdotal reports of lengthening short amputation stumps have been published. This article reviews our experience with lengthening short upper extremity amputation stumps in children. Methods All patients who underwent an upper extremity stump lengthening at Shriners Hospital Los Angeles with at least 1-year follow-up were included. Charts and radiographs were retrospectively reviewed and prosthetic use preoperatively and postoperatively, complications, and additional procedures were documented. Stump length was measured on radiographs as the length between the proximal flexion crease and the tip of the bone. Results Eleven patients with 14 amputation stumps underwent lengthening. Mean stump length increase was 264% (4 cm). Nine patients desired prosthetic fitting; all except 1 were able to be fit with an appropriate-level prosthesis. Two of the 9 patients reported only using the prosthesis on rare occasions. The 2 remaining patients underwent lengthening to improve function but did not desire a prosthesis preoperatively. Conclusions Lengthening is a viable but controversial option for very short upper extremity amputation stumps and may result in better function and/or more appropriate prosthetic fitting. Complications and additional procedures are common. Soft tissue coverage seems to be the main limiting factor to lengthening.

Free vascularized tissue transfer to preserve upper extremity amputation level is an uncommon procedure. The authors investigate the role of free tissue transfer in preserving both morphology and function of the amputated upper extremity, with the goal of facilitating prosthetic rehabilitation.Thirteen patients who underwent microsurgical free tissue transfer to preserve upper extremity amputation level were reviewed retrospectively. These cases were selected from four centers: Duke University Medical Center (Durham, N.C.) University Hospital of Modena (Modena, Italy), Careggi University Hospital (Florence, Italy), and the University of Heidelberg (Heidelberg, Germany). Parameters that were evaluated included age, sex, cause of the defect, reconstructive procedure, structures to be salvaged, and functional outcome, among others.The cause of amputation was trauma in 92 percent of patients. Mean age was 32 years. In 31 percent of the cases, an emergency free fillet flap was used, and in the remaining 69 percent, a traditional free flap was performed. Structures/function to be preserved included pinch function to the hand, function of the elbow and shoulder joints, and skeletal length greater than 7 cm. Complications occurred in 38 percent of the cases, but the final goal of the procedure was achieved in all cases. A treatment algorithm for the management of the amputated upper extremity is presented.Use of free vascularized tissue transfer for preservation of upper extremity amputation level in well-selected cases facilitates prosthetic rehabilitation and improves residual limb function.

This study evaluates the averaged kinematic motion of kayak paddling of two expert kayakers under three conditions (no prosthesis, pseudo-prosthesis with TRS kayak hand, and pseudo-prosthesis with USF kayak hand) compared with the kinematic motion of kayak paddling of individuals with upper

Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) offers the potential for improved prosthetic function by reclaiming the neural control information that is lost as a result of upper extremity amputation. In addition to the prosthetic control benefits, TMR is a potential treatment for postamputation neuroma pain. Here, we present our surgical technique for TMR nerve transfers in transhumeral and shoulder disarticulation patients.

The importance of integrating the surgical, prosthetic, and rehabilitation treatment of a person with upper limb loss to optimize outcome has never been more evident. A limb amputation leaves a number of critical structural challenges that can be optimized by diligent surgical approaches. Advances in socket technology, prosthetic components, and control strategies have improved dramatically over the last decade. Exciting developments in neural interface control, signal processing, and engineered devices create a shifting landscape of which surgeons and rehabilitation practitioners need to be aware in order to create optimal outcomes for patients with limb loss. This chapter provides an overview of the current state-of-the-art surgical and prosthetic management approaches for upper limb amputation, as well as a glance at some of the exciting developments on the horizon.

Functional goals and treatment are the basis for occupational therapy. Following upper extremity amputation patients can benefit significantly from a program that concentrates on setting and achieving functional goals. Few hand therapists have the opportunity to treat a large number of amputees. This case study of treatment of above-elbow amputation discusses the use of an activities of daily living form as an aid to developing and meeting short-term goals in treatment planning.

The purpose of this paper is to compare a group of patients with upper extremity amputation injuries who presented to a tertiary referral center without having been previously seen at another hospital versus a group of patients who was transferred from another facility. We hypothesize that transferred patients will generally undergo more complex treatments, that some transferred patients will be treated in the ER with simple treatments (thereby perhaps not requiring transfer), and that transferred patients will be less likely to have insurance coverage.All patients who presented to our ER from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008 with the classification of hand and finger amputation were included. Data collected included whether or not the patient was transferred from another institution, age, mechanism of injury, partial versus total amputation, location treated, transportation method, general treatment classification, type of insurance, and month of presentation.No statistical difference was found between patients who were transferred versus those who were not with respect to age, sex, mechanism, whether the amputation was partial versus complete, or insurance coverage. Statistical differences were noted between the subset of patients who was transferred versus those who were not with respect to treatment location, method of transportation, and treatment.Patients transferred to our institution required significantly more complex treatments and were significantly more likely to be treated in the operating room. A small but significant group of patients was treated in the ER or required relatively simple treatments after transfer. Our hypothesis that a higher percentage of patients transferred to our institution would have less insurance coverage was not supported by the data. Tertiary centers can expect to continue receiving a steady stream of amputation referrals.

Multi-segmental amputation caused by machine is rare, multi-amputation injures is complex and difficult in operation and replantation. An 18-year-old boy presented with completely amputation of the right forearm, wrist and thumb. On admission, he had clear consciousness. The operation started 3 h after the accident and was carried out simultaneously by two replantation teams and three procedures under brachial plexus anesthesia (the right forearm team; wrist and hand team). The replanted limb, hand and thumb were survived well. Our case was unusual in replantation of severed limb. Our case stated a replantation of upper extremity with associated a very rarely seen multi-level type amputation.

Background Extremity injuries necessitating splinting or casting are commonly seen in the emergency department (ED) setting. Subsequently, it is not uncommon for patients to present to the ED with complaints related to an extremity cast or splint. Objective To present a literature-based approach to the identification and initial management of patients with possible infectious cast/splint complications in the ED setting. Case Reports We present two cases of serious infectious complications arising from extremity cast/splint placement seen in a single pediatric ED: a case of toxic shock syndrome in an 8-year-old child, and a case of necrotizing fasciitis resulting in upper extremity amputation in a 3-year-old child. Conclusions/Summary A wide spectrum of potential extremity cast/splint infectious complications may be seen, which include limb- or life-threatening infections such as toxic shock syndrome and necrotizing fasciitis. Simply considering these diagnoses, and removing the cast or splint to carefully inspect the affected extremity, are potential keys to early identification and optimal outcome of cast/splint complications. It is also prudent to maintain particular vigilance when treating a patient with a water-exposed cast, which may lead to moist padding, skin breakdown, and potential infection. In patients with suspected serious infections, aggressive fluid management and antibiotic therapy should be initiated and appropriate surgical consultation obtained without delay.