Literature DB >> 26284438

Muscle Viability Revisited: Are We Removing Normal Muscle? A Critical Evaluation of Dogmatic Debridement.

Adam Sassoon1, John Riehl, Amy Rich, Joshua Langford, George Haidukewych, Gary Pearl, Kenneth J Koval.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Determination of muscle viability during debridement is a subjective process with significant consequences. Evaluating muscle color, consistency, contractility, and capacity to bleed (the 4 Cs) was established by a study performed half a century ago. This work reinvestigates the utility of the 4 Cs using current histopathologic techniques.
METHODS: After institutional review board approval, 36 biopsies were prospectively collected at a level-1 trauma center from 20 patients undergoing a debridement for open fracture (81%), compartment syndrome (11%), infection (5%), or crush injury (3%). Surgeons graded the biopsies using the 4 Cs, and provided their overall impression as healthy, borderline, or dead. Blinded pathological analysis was performed on each specimen. A correlation between the 4 Cs and surgeon impression with histopathological diagnosis was sought through a univariate statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The surgeon's impression was dead muscle in 25 specimens, borderline in 10, and healthy in 1. Pathological analysis of the 35 specimens considered as dead or borderline muscle by the surgeon demonstrated normal muscle or mild interstitial inflammation in 21 specimens (60%). Color (P = 0.07), consistency (P = 0.12), contractility (P = 0.51), capacity to bleed (P = 0.07), and surgeon impression (P = 0.50) were unable to predict histologic appearance.
CONCLUSIONS: Neither the 4 Cs nor the surgeon's impression correlate with histological findings regarding muscle viability. In 72% of specimens, the treating surgeon's gross assessment differed from the histopathologic appearance. Although the fate of the debrided muscle remains unclear if left in situ, these results raise questions regarding current practices, including the possibility that surgeons are debriding potentially viable muscle. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26284438     DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000423

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0890-5339            Impact factor:   2.512


  6 in total

1.  [Acute therapeutic measures for limb salvage Part 2 : Debridement, lavage techniques and anti-infectious strategies].

Authors:  C Willy; M Stichling; M Müller; R Gatzer; A Kramer; D A Back; D Vogt
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 2.  [Primary soft tissue management in open fracture].

Authors:  F Riechelmann; P Kaiser; R Arora
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 1.154

3.  Controversial case: Revascularization of a popliteal vascular injury of poor prognosis.

Authors:  Erik Hanson-Viana; Mónica González-Rodríguez; Diego García-Vivanco; Mariel González-Calatayud
Journal:  Int J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2018-06-20

4.  Necrotizing fasciitis induced by Vibrio vulnificus in patients without marine contact in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Ronald M Y Wong; Leo T-C Chau; Michael C-K Mak; Wing-Lim Tse; Pak-Cheong Ho
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Combined Upper Extremity and Gluteal Compartment Syndrome Following Illicit Drug Abuse: A Retrospective Case Series.

Authors:  Matthew W Konigsberg; John D Mueller; Jordan A Lebovic; R Kumar Kadiyala
Journal:  Orthop Res Rev       Date:  2020-12-31

6.  Inflammatory and Physiological Consequences of Debridement of Fibrous Tissue after Volumetric Muscle Loss Injury.

Authors:  Benjamin T Corona; Jessica C Rivera; Sarah M Greising
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 4.689

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.