Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33154865›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2020

Perioperative Thromboprophylaxis in Digital Replantation: A Systematic Review.

Dimitris Reissis, Luke Geoghegan, Raghda Sarsam, Quillan Young Sing, Dariush Nikkhah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Principles of microvascular surgery in the upper extremity.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Review
  4. Technical considerations for replantation: from bony fixation to soft tissue coverage.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Article
  5. Current trends in digital replantation-a narrative review.Annals of translational medicine · 2024
    Review
  6. Determinants of Success in Single- and Multi-Digit Replant.Plastic surgery (Oakville, Ont.) · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Dimitris ReissisDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Free NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Luke GeogheganSection of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Raghda SarsamDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, United Kingdom.
Quillan Young SingDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, United Kingdom.
Dariush NikkhahDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Free NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is no international consensus on the use of perioperative thromboprophylaxis in digital replantation. Suboptimal perioperative management may lead to replant failure, which compromises extremity function, worsens psychosocial outcomes for patients, and incurs significant cost. This systematic review evaluates and compares the efficacy and safety of perioperative antithrombotic protocols used in digital replantation.

methodsA Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)--compliant prospectively registered (PROSPERO, CRD42018108695) systematic review was conducted. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched up until December 2019. Articles were assessed for eligibility in duplicate by 2 independent reviewers. All comparative studies that examined the use of perioperative thromboprophylaxis in digital replantation were eligible for inclusion.

resultsCollectively, 1,025 studies were identified of which 7 met full inclusion criteria reporting data from 635 patients (908 digital replants, 86% men, average age 37.3 years). Laceration was the most commonly reported mechanism of injury (68%), with 33% of replantation occurring in Tamai zone III. Fourteen distinct perioperative protocols were identified. One study reported significantly higher digital survival with continuous heparin infusion versus bolus heparin. Five studies demonstrated a significantly higher incidence of complications among patients treated with systemic heparin.

conclusionsThe clinical efficacy and safety of perioperative antithrombotic therapy following digital replantation remains equivocal. The perceived benefits of improved digital survival must be tempered against the adverse systemic side effects of antithrombotic and anticoagulant therapies until further prospectively collected data sets become available.

Identifiers

PMID33154865
PMCPMC7605889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.