ArticleJournal of hand and microsurgery2024
Predictors of leech therapy failure in revascularized and replanted digits.
Article in Journal of hand and microsurgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Venous congestion is a common phenomenon following digital revascularization and replantation. Leech therapy allows for venous outflow while angiogenesis and neovascularization take place. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of leech therapy in the revascularized and replanted digits and determine risk factors for unsuccessful salvage. Materials and methods: A retrospective review was performed to identify all patients with complete or incomplete digital amputations at an academic Level 1 Trauma Center who underwent digital replantation or revascularization from January 2005 to December 2020. Amputations proximal to the palmar arch as well as revascularizations that showed any degree of perfusion on preoperative assessment were excluded. Leech therapy was initiated as soon as any signs of venous congestion appeared and was titrated to clinical effect. Patient demographics, medical history, injury mechanism, extent and level, operative details, leech therapy details, number of blood transfusions, hospitalization length, as well as the digit's ultimate survival data were collected. Results: Of the 159 patients who underwent 213 digital revascularizations (n = 135) and replantations (n = 78), venous congestion requiring leech therapy developed in 27 digits in the revascularization group and in 26 in the replantation group. Of the digits that were leeched, 15 failed in the revascularization group (56 % failure rate) and 17 failed in the replantation group (65 % failure rate). Avulsion mechanism of injury and presence of a circumferential laceration were significantly associated with rate of failure in the revascularization cohort (p < 0.01). Proximal level of injury was significantly associated with rate of failure in the replantation group (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Leech therapy has limited efficacy in avulsed or more proximally injured digits. These data can aid in determining the prognosis of a digit with venous congestion after revascularization and replantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.