IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0137729.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Replantation versus Prosthetic Fitting in Traumatic Arm Amputations: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Iris A Otto
  • Moshe Kon
  • Arnold H Schuurman
  • L Paul van Minnen

Abstract

Background: Traumatic arm amputations can be treated with replantation or surgical formalization of the stump with or without subsequent prosthetic fitting. In the literature, many authors suggest the superiority of replantation. This systematic review compared available literature to analyze whether replantation is functionally and psychologically more profitable than formalization and prosthetic fitting in patients with traumatic arm amputation. Methods: Functional outcome and satisfaction levels were recorded of patients with amputation levels below elbow, through elbow, and above elbow. Results: Functional outcomes of 301 replantation patients and 172 prosthesis patients were obtained. In the replantation group, good or excellent functional scores were reported in 39% of above elbow, 55% of through elbow, and 50% of below elbow amputation cases. Nearly 100% of patients were satisfied with the replanted limb. In the prosthesis group, full use of the prosthesis was attained in 48% of above elbow and in 89% of below elbow amputation patients. Here, 29% of patients elected not to use the prosthesis for reasons including pain and functional superfluity. In both replantation patients and prosthesis wearers, a below elbow amputation yielded better functional results than higher amputation levels. Conclusions: Replantation of a traumatically amputated arm leads to good function and higher satisfaction rates than a prosthesis, regardless of the objective functional outcome. Sensation and psychological well-being seem the two major advantages of replantation over a prosthesis. The current review of the available literature shows that in carefully selected cases replantation could be the preferred option of treatment.

Suggested Citation

  • Iris A Otto & Moshe Kon & Arnold H Schuurman & L Paul van Minnen, 2015. "Replantation versus Prosthetic Fitting in Traumatic Arm Amputations: A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-11, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0137729
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137729
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0137729
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0137729&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0137729?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0137729. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.