Yoneda Hidemasa, Takeda Shinsuke, Saeki Masaomi, Iwatsuki Katsuyuki, Yamamoto Michiro, Tatebe Masahiro, Hirata Hitoshi
Department of Human Enhancement and Hand surgery, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.
Orthopedic surgery of Toyohashi Municipal Hospital, Toyohashi, Aichi, Japan.
Injury. 2024 Apr;55(4):111447. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2024.111447. Epub 2024 Feb 24.
The purpose of scoring systems is to aid in the decision-making process of whether to salvage or amputate mangled extremities, but their efficacy for upper limbs is uncertain. In this study, we examined the predictive potential of scoring systems for upper limb salvage.
Two investigators undertook a systematic search of 3 leading databases for English or Japanese literature from 1985, when the first scoring system to evaluate mangled extremities was proposed, until January 2022. To be eligible, studies must have had upper extremity limb salvage or amputation as an outcome, and identified the scoring system used and treatment outcome in individual cases.
Ten studies (N = 338) of the Mangled Extremity Scoring System (MESS) were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.95 (95 % CI = 0.69-0.99) and 0.81 (0.65-0.91), respectively. The area under the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.95 (0.93-0.97). A subgroup analysis showed lower specificity in isolated vascular injuries. Scoring systems other than MESS were ineligible for the quantitative synthesis because none were examined in an adequate number of publications.
The pooled sensitivity and specificity for MESS were comparable to those reported for the lower extremities. The specificity suggests that limb salvage was achieved in at least 20 % of the patients whose MESS was above the threshold beyond which amputation is indicated. Given the likelihood of upper extremity functional limitations following amputation and the drawbacks of prostheses, we conclude that current scoring systems poorly predict salvageability of a mangled upper extremity and should not be used to justify amputation.
评分系统的目的是辅助决定对严重毁损的肢体进行保肢还是截肢,但它们对上肢的有效性尚不确定。在本研究中,我们检验了评分系统对上肢保肢的预测潜力。
两名研究者对3个主要数据库进行了系统检索,以查找1985年(首个评估严重毁损肢体的评分系统被提出的年份)至2022年1月的英文或日文文献。符合条件的研究必须以上肢保肢或截肢作为结局,并明确在个体病例中使用的评分系统和治疗结局。
最终有10项关于严重肢体损伤评分系统(MESS)的研究(N = 338)纳入了荟萃分析。合并敏感性和特异性分别为0.95(95%CI = 0.69 - 0.99)和0.81(0.65 - 0.91)。分层汇总受试者工作特征曲线下面积为0.95(0.93 - 0.97)。亚组分析显示,单纯血管损伤时特异性较低。除MESS之外的评分系统因在足够数量的出版物中未被检验,不符合定量合成的条件。
MESS的合并敏感性和特异性与下肢报道的结果相当。特异性表明,在MESS高于截肢阈值的患者中,至少20%实现了保肢。鉴于截肢后上肢功能受限的可能性以及假肢的缺点,我们得出结论,目前的评分系统对严重毁损上肢的保肢可能性预测不佳,不应将其用于证明截肢的合理性。