ArticleCureus2024
Digital Replantation In Hours Versus Out of Hours: A Retrospective Review of Outcomes.
Article in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe British Society for Surgery of the Hand's (BSSH) Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) guidelines recommend that surgery for traumatic amputations of the digits is ideally performed during normal working hours even if this results in a delay of up to 24 hours.
objectiveTo compare current practice against the BSSH GIRFT guideline regarding the timing of digital replantation and to compare the success rate of replantation performed within working hours (same or next day) and outside of working hours. MATERIALS AND
methodsA single-centre retrospective analysis of two years of digital replantation was performed. A comparison was made between success rate of those operated within and outside of normal working hours. Secondary outcomes included operating time, rate of revision surgery, rate of interposition vein grafting, and the effect of the mechanism of injury on success rate.
resultsA total of 32 digital replantation attempts were included in 21 patients. 71.9% of cases (n=23) were performed within normal working hours, demonstrating good compliance with GIRFT guidelines. The success rate of digital replantation attempts was 68.8% overall (n=22). The success rate of same day in hours replantation was 66.7% (n=6), 78.6% (n=11) for next day in hours replantation, and 55.6% (n=5) for digital replantation attempts made out of hours. Revision surgery was required in 28.13% of all replant attempts (n=9). 55.56% (n=5) of cases requiring revision were ultimately successful. The rate of vein graft use was highest in cases taking place same day in hours (75%; n=3) and lowest in cases same day out of hours (22% n=2). The average operating time per digit was 5.5 hours for same day in hours cases, 4.8 hours for next day in hours cases, and 7.1 hours for out of hours cases.
conclusionDigital replantation during normal working hours was associated with higher success rate although no statistically significant difference was observed between timing groups. Replantation during normal working hours was associated with shorter operating time per digit, and lower revision rate, although statistical testing was not performed.
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.