Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Management of Artery-Only Digit Replantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Systematic review published in Plast Reconstr Surg (2022)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: June 18, 2026Geprüft von: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Systematic reviewKlinische StudienArzneimittelentwicklungCrowe CS et al. · Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2022

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Artery-only replantation may be necessary in circumstances when venous repair cannot be performed due to their size or vessel injury. Venous congestion of the replanted part is inevitable. A systematic review was performed to identify techniques for mitigating congestion and analyze the outcomes of those techniques. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify relevant articles related to artery-only replantation. An initial query identified 1286 unique articles. A total of 55 articles were included in the final review. Included studies were categorized by decongestive technique. Data from each article included the number of patients treated, level of amputation, graft use, anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy, replant viability, and follow-up duration. Weighted averages were determined from studies that reported five or more digits. RESULTS: A total of 1498 individual digital replantations were described. Very rarely did studies report artery-only replantation proximal to the distal interphalangeal joint. An overall survival rate of 78.5 percent was found irrespective of technique but was variable based on each particular study. Studies utilizing medicinal leech therapy were more likely to report use of intravenous anticoagulation, whereas surface bleeding techniques were more likely to report use of topical or local anticoagulant. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of a vein for anastomosis should not be regarded as a contraindication to replantation. These digits instead require a method to establish reliable drainage sufficient to allow for low resistance inflow and maintain a physiologic pressure gradient across capillary beds. The surgeon should select a decongestive technique that best suits the patient and their specific injury.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeJournal ArticleSystematic Review
Indexed MeSH termsAmputation, SurgicalAmputation, TraumaticAnticoagulantsArteriesFinger InjuriesFingersHumansReplantation

Zusammenfassung

Across 55 included studies (1,498 digital replants), overall survival was 78.5% irrespective of decongestive technique. Studies using medicinal leech therapy were more likely to also use intravenous anticoagulation than studies using surface bleeding techniques.

Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist

This systematic review of 55 articles encompassing 1,498 digital artery-only replantations analyzed various decongestive techniques used when venous repair cannot be performed. The overall survival rate was 78.5% irrespective of technique, though survival was variable based on each particular study. Studies utilizing medicinal leech therapy were more likely to report use of intravenous anticoagulation, whereas surface bleeding techniques were more likely to report use of topical or local anticoagulant. For ASH's domain, this review documents leech therapy as one decongestive technique among several used in artery-only replantation. The authors conclude that the surgeon should select a decongestive technique that best suits the patient and their specific injury. The caveat is that survival rates varied by individual study, and the abstract does not report a direct comparison of technique efficacy.

Zitation

Management of Artery-Only Digit Replantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Crowe CS et al. · Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2022

Verwandter klinischer Kontext

Zur ASH-Bibliothek hinzugefügt: May 26, 2026 · Letzte Aktualisierung der Website: June 18, 2026

Diese Website stellt Bildungsinformationen bereit und ist weder eine medizinische Beratung noch eine Diagnose oder Behandlungsempfehlung. Die medizinische Blutegeltherapie ist mit klinisch relevanten Risiken verbunden und sollte ausschließlich von qualifizierten Klinikerinnen und Klinikern unter institutionell genehmigten Protokollen durchgeführt werden. Die FDA-510(k)-Zulassung für medizinische Blutegel ist auf bestimmte Indikationen beschränkt; experimentelle und Off-Label-Diskussionen werden entsprechend gekennzeichnet. Für patientenspezifische Beratung wenden Sie sich an eine qualifizierte Gesundheitsfachkraft.