ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2025
Re-evaluation of cutting criteria for limb amputation using the Mangled Extremity Severity Score.
Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Limb salvage marches on: re-evaluating the MESS threshold in modern trauma care.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Decision-making regarding amputation in severe open extremity fractures is challenging. Various scoring systems, such as the Mangled Extremity Severity Score (MESS), have guided critical decisions for nearly three decades, yet no consensus or clear criteria have been established. The aim of this study is to identify predictive factors for amputation in open extremity fractures using MESS. Method: We retrospectively analyzed patients with open limb fractures classified as Gustilo-Anderson type 3B or 3C, treated between April 2013 and September 2024 at two tertiary hospitals in Osaka, Japan. We compared MESS values between patients who underwent limb preservation and those who required amputation at any time during hospitalization and performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to identify the optimal MESS cut-off value for predicting amputation. Results: The preservation and amputation groups comprised 36 and 18 patients, respectively. The mean (±SD) total MESS was significantly lower in the preservation group than that in the amputation group (5.7±1.5 vs 8.0±1.4; p≤0.001). MESS ≥7 demonstrated a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 78%, whereas MESS ≥8 showed increased specificity (92%) with slightly reduced sensitivity (78%). The area under the curve for MESS was 0.86, and for MESS ≥8, it was significantly higher than that for MESS ≥7 (p=0.020). Conclusion: Although MESS remains a valuable tool for decision-making in amputation, our findings suggest that a revised cut-off score of 8 may better reflect the current trauma management capabilities. This adjustment could enhance the predictive accuracy of MESS, facilitating more informed clinical decisions in severe limb trauma. Level of evidence: III.
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.