Elsevier

Chirurgie de la Main

Volume 33, Issue 3, June 2014, Pages 174-182
Chirurgie de la Main

Recent advance
Combat-related upper extremity injuries: Surgical management specificities on the theatres of operationsTraumatismes de guerre du membre supérieur : spécificités du traitement chirurgical sur les théâtres d’opérations

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.main.2014.02.003Get rights and content

Abstract

This review presents the current surgical management of combat-related upper extremity injuries during the acute phase. The strategy consists of saving the life, saving the limb and retaining function. Surgical tactics are based on damage control orthopaedics techniques of haemorrhage control, wound debridement, and temporary bone stabilization prior to evacuation out of the combat zone. Features of the definitive management of local casualties in battlefield medical facilities are also discussed. In this situation, reconstructive procedures have to take into account the limited resources and operational constraints.

Résumé

Cette mise au point présente les principes actuels de la prise en charge chirurgicale des traumatismes du membre supérieur de guerre à la phase initiale. La stratégie consiste à sauver la vie, sauver le membre et préserver la fonction. Les tactiques chirurgicales reposent sur des techniques de damage control orthopédique, basées sur le contrôle de l’hémorragie, la décontamination des plaies et la stabilisation provisoire des fractures, avant l’évacuation des blessés vers la métropole. Les particularités du traitement définitif des blessés locaux dans les structures chirurgicales de l’avant sont également développées. Dans ce contexte, les techniques de reconstruction employées doivent tenir compte des moyens techniques disponibles et des impératifs opérationnels.

Introduction

Guidelines for management of gunshot wounds and blast injuries of the hand and upper extremity have been widely described [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Although war-type wounds can be encountered in civilian practice, surgeons in combat situation have to treat highly contaminated wounds with specific constraints due to associated injuries, delayed management and limited resources [3], [6]. In current asymmetric conflicts, the use of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) often causes devastating blast injuries that combine multiple high-energy fractures, traumatic amputations and extensive soft-tissue defects. A sequential management approach based on damage control surgery principles is always required. Life and limb-salvage procedures are provided in battlefield Medical Treatment Facilities (MTFs) prior to intercontinental medical evacuation to military trauma centres where definitive treatment is provided [8], [9].

Despite numerous publications about modern war Damage Control Orthopaedics (DCO), details of the primary care for hand and upper extremity injuries are rarely described in published studies [9]. Conversely, principles for secondary reconstruction have been recently defined – they are nearly the same as those used in civilian practice [4], [10], [11], [12]. However, definitive treatment is also performed within the combat zone for local resident patients [13]. Due to the lack of hand and plastic surgeons in local hospitals or forward MTFs, reconstructive procedures are mostly performed by orthopaedic surgeons with limited microsurgery training.

The main purpose of this article is to describe how DCO procedures apply to managing hand and upper extremity injuries on the battlefield. Possibilities for reconstruction procedures on local residents without performing complex microvascular surgery are also detailed.

Section snippets

Levels of medical care on the battlefield

Various levels of medical care with sequential management have been developed to ensure that injured military personnel receive the best possible medical care [2].

Level 1 care is performed by the wounded soldier's immediate combat colleagues, then by paramedics or an emergency medical team. The first objective is to stop the bleeding by applying pressure dressings, tactical tourniquets or local haemostatic agents into the wound. When junctional bleeding in the axillary area cannot be controlled

Haemorrhage control

The first priority is to stop the bleeding by identifying and controlling any injured blood vessel. This can easily be performed using a pneumatic tourniquet above the elbow, but proximal brachial artery injuries require control by clamp at the axillary level through a deltopectoral or transpectoral approach (Fig. 3). In this case the field tourniquet is included in the sterile draping and removed once vascular control has been achieved [16]. Otherwise, salvage amputation should be considered

Soft-tissue coverage

Repeated marginal debridement is required every 48–72 hours until the wound becomes clean enough to be closed safely. Delayed primary closure should ideally be performed within 5 to 7 days [10]. However, this task is difficult or impossible to achieve in heavily contaminated wounds and/or in polytrauma patients [10], [13]. Soft-tissue reconstruction is often delayed until the subacute phase once the wound is macroscopically clean and the patient stabilized. This delay does not seem to negatively

Conclusion

Initial management of upper extremity combat-related injuries is based on bleeding control, wound decontamination and temporary bone stabilization according to war DCO principles. Definitive management is performed after evacuation out of the combat zone, except for local residents for whom the reconstruction has to be carried out in battlefield MTFs. Expertise in nerve microsurgery and pedicled flaps is useful for every orthopaedic surgeon deployed in these structures.

Disclosure of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest concerning this article.

References (45)

  • R. Breda et al.

    Compartment syndrome of the hand

    Chir Main

    (2012)
  • A.C. Beekley et al.

    Lessons learned from modern military surgery

    Surg Clin N Am

    (2007)
  • C.J. Taylor et al.

    Functional splinting of upper limb injuries with gauze-based topical negative pressure wound therapy

    J Hand Surg Am

    (2011)
  • R. Nathan

    The management of penetrating trauma of the hand

    Hand Clin

    (1999)
  • A.C. Masquelet et al.

    Reconstruction des pertes de substance osseuse diaphysaire d’origine traumatique. Stratégies, recommandations, perspectives

    Rev Chir Orthop

    (2012)
  • C. Oberlin et al.

    Gunshot injuries to the nerves

    Chir Main

    (2011)
  • L. Resnik et al.

    Advanced upper limb prosthetic devices implications for upper limb prosthetic rehabilitation

    Arch Phys Med Rehabil

    (2012)
  • A. Fabre et al.

    Plaies de la main par projectiles. In

  • A. Fabre

    Main de blast

  • D. Evriviades et al.

    Shaping the military wound: issues surrounding the reconstruction of injured servicemen at the Royal center for defence medicine

    Philos Trans R Soc London B Biol Sci

    (2011)
  • A.R. Kumar et al.

    Lessons from the modern battlefield: successful upper extremity injury reconstruction in the subacute period

    J Trauma

    (2009)
  • C. Klem et al.

    Microvascular reconstructive surgery in Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom: the US military experience performing free flaps in a combat zone

    J Trauma Acute Care Surg

    (2013)
  • Cited by (25)

    • Wartime upper-extremity injuries in the Sahelian strip: Experience from a French Forward Surgical Team deployed in Mali

      2022, Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation
      Citation Excerpt :

      This strategy is based on three principles: debridement, temporary fracture stabilization, and delayed primary closure. Serial marginal debridement is often required in highly contaminated wounds and preferable to a single radical debridement, to preserve injured but viable tissue [16]. Primary closure should be delayed, preventing early infection unless the wound is not grossly contaminated, related to a low velocity missile, and debrided within 6 h of trauma.

    • Management of upper extremity war injuries in the subacute period: A review of 62 cases

      2020, Injury
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, since the process of motor return is late and uncertain (due to the long reinnervation distance), we added nerve or tendon transfer to the treatment in these cases. Mathieu et al. stated that due to the indeterminate and variable healing pattern of nerve injuries of war and their irregular follow-up, nerve and/or tendon transfers are necessary [39]. Nerve transfers have many advantages; unlike nerve grafts, the waiting period for reinnervation is not long, the procedure is performed outside of the trauma region with healthy tissues, and unlike tendon transfers nerve transfers do not disrupt the natural anatomy.

    • Temporary fixation of limbs and pelvis

      2018, Orthopaedics and Traumatology: Surgery and Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      The shunt is set up first to ensure revascularization during the fixation procedure. Definitive vascular repair can then be performed on a stabilized limb, in the same surgical step or after transferring the patient to another structure [29]. This first step needs to be carefully considered, foreseeing subsequent surgical steps, with appropriate selection of techniques, and notably temporary fixation, so as not to hamper definitive repair.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text