Background: Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) and regenerative peripheral nerve interface (RPNI) procedures have been shown to improve patient-reported outcomes for the treatment of symptomatic neuromas after amputation; however, the specific indications and comparative outcomes of each are unclear. The primary research questions were what complement of nerves most frequently requires secondary pain intervention after conventional amputation, whether this information can guide the focused application of TMR and RPNI to the primary amputation setting, and how the outcomes compare in both settings. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of records for patients who had undergone lower-extremity TMR and/or RPNI at our institution. Eighty-seven procedures were performed: 59 for the secondary treatment of symptomatic neuroma pain after amputation and 28 for primary prophylaxis during amputation. We reviewed records for the amputation level, TMR and/or RPNI timing, pain scores, patient-reported resolution of nerve-related symptoms, and complications or revisions. We evaluated the relationship between the amputation level and the frequency with which each transected nerve required neurologic intervention for pain symptoms. Results: The mean pain score decreased after delayed TMR or RPNI procedures from 4.3 points to 1.7 points (p < 0.001), and the mean final pain score (and standard deviation) was 1.0 ± 1.9 points at the time of follow-up for acute procedures. Symptom resolution was achieved in 92% of patients. The sciatic nerve most commonly required intervention for symptomatic neuroma above the knee, and the tibial nerve and common or superficial peroneal nerve were most problematic following transtibial amputation. None of our patients required a revision pain treatment procedure after primary TMR targeting these commonly symptomatic nerves. Failure to address the tibial nerve during a delayed procedure was associated with an increased risk of unsuccessful TMR, resulting in a revision surgical procedure (odds ratio, 26 [95% confidence interval, 1.8 to 368]; p = 0.02). Conclusions: There is a consistent pattern of symptomatic nerves that require secondary surgical intervention for the management of pain after amputation. TMR and RPNI were translated to the primary amputation setting by using this predictable pattern to devise a surgical strategy that prevents symptomatic neuroma pain. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Introduction: Patients who undergo extremity amputation have historically used socket prosthetics to ambulate and perform daily functions; however, these prosthetics can be limited by poor terminal control and wear issues. In patients who have difficulty wearing their prostheses or with upper extremity amputations, osseointegrated implants may offer better function and quality of life. The Osseointegrated Prostheses for the Rehabilitation of Amputees (OPRA) was the first such device to become commercially available. Clinical trials have demonstrated benefit in patient gait, prosthetic use, and overall well-being, and new implants may be applied for various amputation levels. Areas covered: The OPRA, the most studied osseointegrated prosthetic stem, is reviewed, presenting indications, surgical procedure, complications, and results of clinical studies. Expert commentary: Osseointegration for amputees is an expanding field that has the potential to enhance rehabilitative potential. The OPRA implant is an effective device with a long life-span and low complication profile.

Severe polytraumatic injury initiates a robust immune response. Broad immune dysfunction in patients with such injuries has been well-documented; however, early biomarkers of immune dysfunction post-injury, which are critical for comprehensive intervention and can predict the clinical course of patients, have not been reported. Current circulating markers such as IL-6 and IL-10 are broad, non-specific, and lag behind the clinical course of patients. General blockade of the inflammatory response is detrimental to patients, as a certain degree of regulated inflammation is critical and necessary following trauma. Exosomes, small membrane-bound extracellular vesicles, found in a variety of biofluids, carry within them a complex functional cargo, comprised of coding and non-coding RNAs, proteins, and metabolites. Composition of circulating exosomal cargo is modulated by changes in the intra- and extracellular microenvironment, thereby serving as a homeostasis sensor. With its extensively documented involvement in immune regulation in multiple pathologies, study of exosomal cargo in polytrauma patients can provide critical insights on trauma-specific, temporal immune dysregulation, with tremendous potential to serve as unique biomarkers and therapeutic targets for timely and precise intervention.

Background: Flap-based limb salvage surgery balances the morbidity and complexity of soft tissue transfer against the potential benefit of preserving a functional limb when faced with a traumatized extremity with composite tissue injury. These composite tissue injuries are well suited for multidisciplinary management between orthopaedic and plastic surgeons. Thus, it makes intuitive sense that a collaborative, orthoplastic approach to flap-based limb salvage surgery can result in improved outcomes with decreased risk of flap failure and other complications, raising the question of whether this orthoplastic team approach should be the new standard of care in limb salvage surgery. Questions/purposes: (1) Is there an association between increased annual institutional volume and perioperative complications to include free and local flap failure (substantial flap viability loss necessitating return to the operating room for debridement of a major portion or all of the flap or amputation)? (2) Is an integrated orthoplastic collaborative approach to managing combat-related traumatic injuries of the extremities individually associated with a decreased risk of flap failure and overall flap-related complications? (3) What other factors, such as location of injury, injury severity score, and initial inpatient length of stay, were associated with flap necrosis and flap-related complications? Methods: We performed a retrospective review of the electronic medical records of all patients who underwent flap-based limb salvage for combat-related extremity trauma in the United States Military Health System’s National Capital Region between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2012. In total, 307 patients underwent 330 flap procedures. Of the 330 flaps, 59% (195) were local or pedicled flaps and 41% (135) were free flaps. Patients were primarily male (99% [303]), with a median (interquartile range) age of 24 years old (IQR 21 to 29), and 87% (267 of 307) of injuries were sustained from a blast mechanism. We collected data on patient demographics, annual case volume involving flap coverage of extremities, mechanism of injury, flap characteristics, perioperative complications, flap failure, flap revision, isolated orthopaedic management versus an integrated orthoplastic approach, and other salvage procedures. For the purposes of this study, orthoplastic management refers to operative management of flap coverage with microvascular surgeons present for soft tissue transfer after initial debridement and fixation by orthopaedic surgery. The orthoplastic management was implemented on a case-by-case basis based on individual injury characteristics and the surgeon’s discretion with no formal starting point. When implemented, the orthoplastic team consisted of an orthopaedic surgeon and microvascular-trained hand surgeons and/or plastic surgeons. In all, 77% (254 of 330) of flaps were performed using this model. We considered perioperative flap complications as any complication (such as infection, hematoma, dehiscence, congestion, or necrosis) resulting in return to the operating room for re-evaluation, correction, or partial debridement of the flap. We defined flap failure as a return to the operating room for debridement of a major portion of the flap or amputation secondary to complete or near-complete loss of flap viability. Of the flap procedures, 12% (40 of 330) were classified as a failure and 14% (46 of 330) experienced complications necessitating return to the operating room. Over the study period, free flaps were not more likely to fail than pedicled flaps (11% versus 13%; p = 0.52) or have complications necessitating additional procedures (14% versus 16%; p = 0.65). Results: Our multiple linear regression model demonstrated that an increased number of free flaps performed in our institution annually in any given year was associated with a lower likelihood of failure per case (r = -0.17; p = 0.03) and lower likelihood of reoperation for each flap (r = -0.34; p < 0.001), after adjusting for injury severity and team type (orthoplastic or orthopaedic only). We observed a similar relationship for pedicled flaps, with increased annual case volume associated with a decreased risk of flap failure and reoperation per case after adjusting for injury severity and team type (r = -0.21; p = 0.003 and r = -0.22; p < 0.001, respectively). Employment of a collaborative orthoplastic team approach was associated with decreased flap failures (odds ratio 0.4 [95% confidence interval 0.2 to 0.9]; p = 0.02). Factors associated with flap failure included a lower extremity flap (OR 2.7 [95% CI 1.3 to 6.2]; p = 0.01) and use of muscle flaps (OR 2.3 [95% CI 1.1 to 5.3]; p = 0.02). Conclusion: Although prior reports of combat-related extremity trauma have described greater salvage success with the use of pedicled flaps, these reports are biased by institutional inexperience with free tissue transfer, the lack of a coordinated multiservice effort, and severity of injury bias (the most severe injuries often result in free tissue transfer). Our institutional experience, alongside a growing body of literature regarding complex extremity trauma in the civilian setting, suggest a benefit to free tissue coverage to treat complex extremity trauma with adequate practice volume and collaboration. We demonstrated that flap failure and flap-related complications are inversely associated with institutional experience regardless of flap type. Additionally, a collaborative orthoplastic approach was associated with decreased flap failures. However, these results must be interpreted with consideration for potential confounding between the increased case volume coinciding with more frequent collaboration between orthopaedic and plastic surgeons. Given these findings, consideration of an orthoplastic approach at high-volume institutions to address soft tissue coverage in complex extremity trauma may lead to decreased flap failure...

Background: Amputations sustained owing to combat-related blast injuries are at high risk for deep infection and development of heterotopic ossification, which can necessitate reoperation and place immense strain on the patient. Surgeons at our institution began use of intrawound antibiotic powder at the time of closure in an effort to decrease the rate of these surgical complications after initial and revision amputations, supported by compelling clinical evidence and animal models of blast injuries. Antibiotic powder may be useful in reducing the risk of these infections, but human studies on this topic thus far have been inconclusive. Purpose: We sought to determine whether administration of intrawound antibiotic powder at the time of closure would (1) decrease the risk of subsequent deep infections of major lower-extremity combat-related amputations, and (2) limit formation and decrease severity of heterotopic ossification common in the combat-related traumatic residual limb. Methods: Between 2009 and 2015, 252 major lower extremity initial and revision amputations were performed by a single surgeon. Revision cases were excluded if performed specifically to address deep infection, leaving 223 amputations (88.5%) for this retrospective analysis. We reviewed medical records to collect patient information, returns to the operating room for subsequent infection, and microbiologic culture results. We also reviewed radiographs taken at least 3 months after surgery to determine the presence and severity of heterotopic ossification using the Walter Reed classification system. We grouped cases according to whether limbs underwent initial or revision amputations, and whether the limbs had a history of a prior infection. Apart from the use of antibiotic powder and duration of followup, the groups did not differ in terms of age, mechanism of injury, or sex. We then calculated the absolute risk reduction for infection and heterotopic ossification and the number needed to treat to prevent an infection. Results: Overall, administration of antibiotic powder resulted in a 13% absolute risk reduction of deep infection (14 of 82 [17%] versus 42 of 141 [30%]; p = 0.03; 95% CI, 0.20%-24.72%). In revision amputation surgery, the absolute risk reduction of infection with antibiotic powder use was 16% overall (eight of 58 versus 17 of 57; 95% CI, 1.21%-30.86%), and 25% for previously infected limbs (eight of 46 versus 14 of 33; 95% CI, 4.93%-45.14%). The number needed to treat to prevent one additional deep infection in amputation surgery is eight in initial amputations, seven in revision amputations, and four for revision amputation surgery on previously infected limbs. With the numbers available, we observed no reduction in the risk of heterotopic ossification with antibiotic powder use, but severity was decreased in the treatment group in terms of the number of residual limbs with moderate or severe heterotopic ossification (three of 12 versus 19 of 34; p = 0.03). Conclusions: Our findings show that administration of intrawound antibiotic powder reduces deep infection in residual limbs of combat amputees, particularly in the setting of revision amputation surgery in apparently aseptic residual limbs at the time of the surgery. Furthermore, administration of antibiotic powder for amputations at time of initial closure decreases the severity of heterotopic ossification formation, providing a low-cost adjunct to decrease the risk of two complications common to amputation surgery. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study