Level of surgery does not affect the reamputation rates in patients with diabetic foot ulcers requiring amputation of the ankle or foot

Aim: In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of amputation level on reamputation rates and need for additionalsurgeries in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Material and Methods: Patients who were amputated at the foot and ankle level for diabetic foot ulcers between 2010 and 2019 atour institution were retrospectively evaluated. Amputation types (proximal to distal; Syme, Boyd, Chopart, Lisfranc, Transmetatarsal),previous amputations, need for additional surgeries and reamputations were noted. The effect of amputation level on reamputationand reoperation rates was statistically evaluated.Results: Thirty-one patients (27 male, 4 female) with mean age of 65 years (range 45-84) were included. Reamputation rates forSyme, Boyd, Chopart, Lisfranc and Transmetatarsal (TMA) amputations were 50%, 55%, 50%, 66% and 75% respectively. Fifty percentof the cases in the Syme group, 78% in the Boyd group, 75% in the Chopart group, 83% in the Lisfranc group and 75% in the TMAgroup required repeating surgeries. There was no significant difference in terms of reamputation and reoperation rates betweenamputation levels.Conclusion: If the level of amputation is determined based on viability of the skin flap that would be required for soft tissue cover andconfirmed intraoperatively by inspecting the perfusion of the stump, the amputation level does not have influence on reamputationrates at the foot and ankle. When performing this irreversible procedure, the patient must be well informed about the possiblefunctional outcomes, prosthesis options and reamputation rates.

PDF

___

1. Westberry DE, Carpenter AM, Tisch J, et al. Amputation Outcomes in Congenital Pseudarthrosis of the Tibia. J Pediatr Orthop 2018;38:475-81.
2. NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC). Worldwide trends in diabetes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4.4 million participants. Lancet. 2016;387:1513-30.
3. Satman I, Omer B, Tutuncu Y, et al. Twelve-year trends in the prevalence and risk factors of diabetes and prediabetes in Turkish adults. Eur J Epidemiol 2013 ;28:169-80.
4. Brown ML, Tang W, Patel A, et al. Partial foot amputation in patients with diabetic foot ulcers. Foot Ankle Int 2012;33:707-16.
5. Richard JL, Schuldiner S. Epidemiology of diabetic foot problems. Rev Med Interne 2008;29:222-30.
6. Tosun B, Buluc L, Gok U, et al. Boyd amputation in adults. Foot Ankle Int 2011;32:1063-8.
7. Izumi Y, Satterfield K, Lee S, et al. Risk of reamputation in diabetic patients stratified by limb and level of amputation: a 10-year observation. Diabetes Care 2006;29:566-70.
8. Finkler ES, Marchwiany DA, Schiff AP, et al. Long-term Outcomes Following Syme's Amputation. Foot Ankle Int 2017;38:732-5.
9. Braaksma R, Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JHB. Syme Amputation: A Systematic Review. Foot Ankle Int 2018 ;39:284-91.
10. Waters RL, Perry J, Antonelli D, et al. Energy cost of walking of amputees: the influence of level of amputation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1976;58:42-6.
11. Goktepe AS, Cakir B, Yilmaz B, et al. Energy expenditure of walking with prostheses: comparison of three amputation levels. Prosthet Orthot Int 2010;34:31-6.
12. Pinzur MS, Stuck RM, Sage R, et al. Rabinovich Z. Syme ankle disarticulation in patients with diabetes. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003;85:1667-72.
13. Syme J. Surgical cases and observations. Amputation at the ankle-joint. 1843. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1990 ;256:3-6.
14. McKittrick LS, McKittrick JB, Risley TS. Transmetatarsal Amputation for Infection or Gangrene in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus. Ann Surg 1949;130:826-40.
15. Lieberman JR, Jacobs RL, Goldstock L, et al. Chopart amputation with percutaneous heel cord lengthening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993;296:86-91.
16. Chang BB, Bock DE, Jacobs RL, et al. Increased limb salvage by the use of unconventional foot amputations. J Vasc Surg 1994;19:341-8; discussion 348-9.
17. Mueller MJ, Allen BT, Sinacore DR. Incidence of skin breakdown and higher amputation after transmetatarsal amputation: implications for rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1995;76:50-4.
18. Pollard J, Hamilton GA, Rush SM, et al. Mortality and morbidity after transmetatarsal amputation: retrospective review of 101 cases. J Foot Ankle Surg 2006;45:91-7.
19. Stone PA, Back MR, Armstrong PA, et al. Midfoot amputations expand limb salvage rates for diabetic foot infections. Ann Vasc Surg 2005;19:805-11.
20. Anthony T, Roberts J, Modrall JG, et al. Transmetatarsal amputation: assessment of current selection criteria. Am J Surg 2006;192:8-11.
21. Gormeli G, Gormeli CA, Karakaplan M, et al. The Amputation Endicated Extremity Can Be Recovered by Multidisciplinary Treatment: A Case Report and Review of Literature. [Multidisipliner Yaklaşımla Amputasyon Endikasyonu Olan Ekstremite Kurtarılabilir: Olgu Sunumu ve Literatür Derlemesi]. Med Science 2015;4:2281-8.
22. Wagner FW Jr. Amputations of the foot and ankle. Current status. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1977;122:62-9.
23. Larsson J, Agardh CD, Apelqvist J, et al. Long-term prognosis after healed amputation in patients with diabetes. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998;350:149-58.
24. Gok U, Selek O, Selek A, et al. Survival evaluation of the patients with diabetic major lower-extremity amputations. Musculoskelet Surg 2016;100:145-8.