Lower Extremity Assessment Project (LEAP) – The Best Available Evidence on Limb-Threatening Lower Extremity Trauma
Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, 590 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA.Orthopedic Clinics of North America (Impact Factor: 1.25). 04/2010; 41(2):233-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocl.2009.12.006
Lower Extremity Assessment Project (LEAP) study set out to answer many of the questions surrounding the decision of whether to amputate or salvage limbs in the setting of severe lower extremity trauma. A National Institutes of Health-funded, multicenter, prospective observational study, the LEAP study represented a milestone in orthopedic trauma research, and perhaps in orthopedics. The LEAP study attempted to define the characteristics of the individuals who sustained these injuries, the characteristics of their environment, the variables of the physical aspects of their injury, the secondary medical and mental conditions that arose from their injury and treatment, their ultimate functional status, and their general health. In the realm of evidence-based medicine, the LEAP studies provided a wealth of data, but still failed to completely determine treatment at the onset of severe lower extremity trauma.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Important advances have been made in the management of complex trauma through careful scientific analysis of outcomes. Outcomes analysis in combat extremity trauma is exemplified and highlighted by scholarly work in the treatment of catastrophic lower extremity trauma. The success of this line of research in civilian trauma is exemplified by the Lower Extremity Assessment Project (LEAP) study on the outcomes of civilian lower extremity trauma. This highly successful effort was followed by the Military Extremity Trauma Amputation/Limb Salvage (METALS) study. Current ongoing analysis of both the LEAP and METALS studies by the Major Extremity Trauma Research Consortium seeks to compare and contrast the similarities and differences of both studies and to advance evidence-based patient-centered care. The effects of psychological trauma on the injured individual underscore the global effect of severe trauma and the need for a multidisciplinary approach to trauma care. Statistical modeling is being used to analyze outcomes to further the ability to scientifically and definitively determine the best practices for patient care.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The Ilizarov technique has been used in the UK for the last 20 years in the management of infected non-union of long bones. This method uses fine wires inserted percutaneously which are attached and tensioned to provide a strong frame construct. The majority of tibial and femoral non unions can be treated successfully by internal fixation. However, an infected non-union of the tibia can prove a difficult problem. The Ilizarov method can prove useful for treating these complex injuries. To assess whether a new limb reconstruction centre in the UK has comparable results. Twelve patients (10 M: 2 F; Avg age 43.3 years) who had an infected tibial non-union between March 2009 and August 2010 treated with the Ilizarov technique. Intervention method was Ilizarov technique and main outcome measures include functional and radiological outcomes assessed using the Association for the Study and Application of Methods of Ilizarov (ASAMI) criteria, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS) and Visual Analogue Pain scores. All twelve patients united. None required amputation. Mean time to union was 46 weeks (range 24 - 70/median 50). The average follow up time was 62 weeks (39 - 164/ median 59). According to the ASAMI score bone/radiological results ten were classed as excellent with the remainder being good. Functionally six were graded as excellent, four as good and two as poor. The average AOFAS score was 83/100 (70 - 90) and pain visual analogue scale (VAS) was two. Our results in terms of ASAMI scores are comparable with the published literature. Furthermore, our return to work is better than most European studies (63%). All our patients said they would have the procedure again. We attribute this success partly to the multidisciplinary approach. We recommend early referral to a dedicated unit if there is any evidence of a non-union.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To date, contemporary studies on wartime vascular trauma have focused on acute management strategies and early results, with no characterization of enduring functional limb salvage or its relation to quality of life. The objective of this study was to describe long-term, patient-based quality of life and function after extremity vascular injury (EVI). The Joint Theater Trauma Registry was queried for U.S. troops with EVI. Injury and management data was obtained and the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey administered after patient contact and consent. Demographic, injury, and management variables were analyzed and examined for correlation with the primary end points of favorable or unfavorable outcome defined by SF-36 Mental (MCS) or Physical Component Summary (PCS) scores of >42 or <42 (effect size ≥0.8). Surveys were completed by 214 patients, who were a median age of 25 years (range, 19-52 years). The Injury Severity Score was 15.3 ± 8.6 and the Mangled Extremity Severity Score was 5.65 ± 1.4. Amputation-free survival was 84% at mean follow-up of 61 ± 24 months. Overall SF-36 PCS and MCS scores were 43.0 ± 9.2 and 46.6 ± 12.4, respectively, with 92 respondents (43%) reporting favorable outcomes on both MCS and PCS. On multivariate analysis, older age, severe extremity injury (Mangled Extremity Severity Scores ≥7), and chronic pain were predictive of unfavorable physical outcomes (P < .05). Presence of pain, nerve injury, and junior rank (<E7) were predictive of unfavorable MCS scores (P < .05). Higher educational background (baccalaureate or above) was associated with favorable outcome (P < .05). This study reports the first long-term patient-centered outcomes data after wartime EVI. At 5 years after injury, quality-of-life measures are reduced compared with national norms. Understanding high-risk characteristics, both demographic- and injury-specific, that are associated with unfavorable outcomes will help guide future acute management and long-term recovery strategies.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.