Challenges in measuring outcomes following digital replantation

In the early period of replantation surgery, the emphasis was on digit survival. Subsequently, with better microsurgical techniques and instrumentation, the focus has shifted to function and in recent years to consideration of cost-effectiveness. Despite over 40 years of effort in refining digital replantation surgery, a rigorous evaluation of the outcomes of digital replantation has not been performed. This is because of the many confounding variables that influence outcome comparisons. These variables include the mechanism of injury (guillotine, crush, avulsion), the injury itself (total, near total, subtotal, partial amputation), and the surgical procedure (replantation, revascularization). In addition, the traditional outcome measures (two-point discrimination, range of motion, grip strength, or the ability to return to work) are reported inconsistently and vary widely among publications. All these factors make meaningful comparison of outcomes difficult. The recent emphasis on outcome research and cost-effectiveness necessitates a rethinking in the way we report outcomes of digital replantation. In this article, the authors summarize the challenges in assessing outcomes of digital replantation and explain the need to measure outcomes using rigorous clinical research designs that incorporate cost-effectiveness studies in the research protocol.

Resumen tomado de PubMed (NCBI) para el registro citado, en el idioma original. La versión de referencia es la de la publicación original.

El resumen se deja sin traducir para conservar la redacción original de los autores.

The authors outline why digital replantation outcomes remain hard to compare—injury mechanisms, amputation types, procedures and inconsistently reported measures such as two-point discrimination—and advocate rigorous study designs incorporating cost-effectiveness analysis for outcome evaluation.

Explore cómo esta investigación se conecta con la práctica clínica

Más estudios revisados por pares en la categoría «Ensayos clínicos».

• Leech Therapy for Knee Osteoarthritis — The Landmark RCT — Michalsen et al. (2003)
• Leech-Assisted Flap Salvage — Systematic Review of 277 Cases — Whitaker et al. (2012)
• Effects of hirudotherapy on liver functions, lipid profile, and insulin sensitivity in rats with metabolic syndrome — Bilden A et al. (2026)
• Efficacy and Safety of Hirudotherapy for Improving Sperm Quality Parameters in Male Infertility: A Randomized Controlled Trial — Abtahi-Forooshani M et al. (2026)
• Reverse Sural Flap Venous Congestion Successfully Managed With Enoxaparin in a Male Patient With a Traumatic Foot Crush Injury: A Case Report — Velasco-Bustamante J et al. (2026)
• Investigación de los efectos terapéuticos del tratamiento con sanguijuelas medicinales sobre la lesión por isquemia-reperfusión de la extremidad inferior — Ünal K et al. (2026)
• Efficacy of Medicinal Leech Therapy in Diverse Clinical Applications: A Comprehensive Study from Azerbaijan — Farzali S et al. (2025)
• HIRUDOTHERAPY IN RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY: CASE-REPORTS AND REVIEW — Heinz P et al. (2020)
• Hirudoterapia en la cicatrización de heridas — Nair H et al. (2022)
• Improvement of patient care through hirudotherapy and the management of leeches from their reception to their disposal in France — Vaesken C et al. (2023)

Ver toda la investigación analizada por la ASH →