A Comparative Analysis of Functional and Patient-reported Outcomes following Lisfranc and Chopart Amputations in High-risk Limb Salvage Patients.
A Comparative Analysis of Functional and Patient-reported Outcomes following Lisfranc and Chopart Amputations in High-risk Limb Salvage Patients.
- 2023
Available online through MWHC library: 2003 - present, Available in print through MWHC library:1999-2007
Midfoot amputations provide an opportunity for limb salvage through preservation of a weight-bearing limb. However, the longevity of midfoot amputations is threatened by restrictions in surface area and risks of skin breakdown. To better inform decisions surrounding the level of amputation, we sought to compare outcomes of high-risk individuals who underwent Lisfranc or Chopart amputations. A single-center retrospective cohort study was performed from November 2013 to September 2022 of adult patients who underwent Lisfranc or Chopart amputations. Patients were stratified into cohorts based on the amputation type. Outcomes included postoperative rates of re-amputation, functional status, mortality and patient-reported outcome measures in the form of Lower Extremity Functional Scale scores. Sixty-six patients were identified; of which, 45 underwent Lisfranc amputation, and 21 underwent Chopart amputation. Median Charlson Comorbidity Index was 7, signifying a substantial comorbidity burden. By median follow-up of 14 (Interquartile range: 28) months, 31 patients (36%) progressed to higher-level amputation, and most patients were ambulatory (n=38, 58%). Overall rates of re-amputation, ambulatory status, and mortality were comparable between groups. Re-amputation to another midfoot amputation was more common among the Lisfranc cohort (n=16, 36% versus n=1, 5%), whereas re-amputation to BKA was more prevalent among the Chopart cohort (Chopart: n=7, 33% versus Lisfranc: n=7, 16%; p=0.011). Average Lower Extremity Functional Scale scores were similar between groups and corresponded to a maximal function of 48%. Lisfranc and Chopart amputations have the potential to be efficacious limb salvage options in high-risk patient populations in conjunction with intraoperative biomechanical optimization and optimal preoperative patient selection. Copyright � 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.
English
1067-2516
10.1053/j.jfas.2023.04.014 [doi] S1067-2516(23)00117-5 [pii]
IN PROCESS -- NOT YET INDEXED--Automated
MedStar Heart & Vascular Institute
MedStar Washington Hospital Center
Surgery/Podiatric Surgery
Journal Article
Available online through MWHC library: 2003 - present, Available in print through MWHC library:1999-2007
Midfoot amputations provide an opportunity for limb salvage through preservation of a weight-bearing limb. However, the longevity of midfoot amputations is threatened by restrictions in surface area and risks of skin breakdown. To better inform decisions surrounding the level of amputation, we sought to compare outcomes of high-risk individuals who underwent Lisfranc or Chopart amputations. A single-center retrospective cohort study was performed from November 2013 to September 2022 of adult patients who underwent Lisfranc or Chopart amputations. Patients were stratified into cohorts based on the amputation type. Outcomes included postoperative rates of re-amputation, functional status, mortality and patient-reported outcome measures in the form of Lower Extremity Functional Scale scores. Sixty-six patients were identified; of which, 45 underwent Lisfranc amputation, and 21 underwent Chopart amputation. Median Charlson Comorbidity Index was 7, signifying a substantial comorbidity burden. By median follow-up of 14 (Interquartile range: 28) months, 31 patients (36%) progressed to higher-level amputation, and most patients were ambulatory (n=38, 58%). Overall rates of re-amputation, ambulatory status, and mortality were comparable between groups. Re-amputation to another midfoot amputation was more common among the Lisfranc cohort (n=16, 36% versus n=1, 5%), whereas re-amputation to BKA was more prevalent among the Chopart cohort (Chopart: n=7, 33% versus Lisfranc: n=7, 16%; p=0.011). Average Lower Extremity Functional Scale scores were similar between groups and corresponded to a maximal function of 48%. Lisfranc and Chopart amputations have the potential to be efficacious limb salvage options in high-risk patient populations in conjunction with intraoperative biomechanical optimization and optimal preoperative patient selection. Copyright � 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.
English
1067-2516
10.1053/j.jfas.2023.04.014 [doi] S1067-2516(23)00117-5 [pii]
IN PROCESS -- NOT YET INDEXED--Automated
MedStar Heart & Vascular Institute
MedStar Washington Hospital Center
Surgery/Podiatric Surgery
Journal Article