Digital Replantation Research Articles

Systematic Review of Replant Salvage and Cost Utility Analysis of Inpatient Monitoring After Digit Replantation

Digit replantation is a high-stakes procedure that has been shown to be cost-effective, especially for multiple-digit replantation. However, it is associated with prolonged lengths of stay (LOS) for monitoring and attempts at salvage. The cost-effectiveness of prolonged inpatient stays presumes that this is necessary and inherent to the replantation. We hypothesized that prolonged monitoring of replanted digits, in the hope of possible salvage after primary failure, is cost-ineffective due to the low rates of vascular compromise and salvage after replantation. Using previously published data comparing quality adjusted life years lost after traumatic digit amputation versus digit replantation, we devised a cost utility model to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of inpatient monitoring. To determine rates of vascular compromise and salvage after digit replantation, we performed a systematic review of the literature through MEDLINE and SCOPUS database searches to identify relevant articles on digital replantation since 1990. Cost-effectiveness was stratified based on the number of digits replanted. Fewer than 9% of replanted digits both experience vascular compromise and are successfully salvaged. Adjusting for this, inpatient monitoring for single-digit and thumb replantation becomes cost-ineffective after 1 day of admission and monitoring for multiple-digit replantation becomes cost-ineffective after 2 days of admission. In the United States, prolonged admissions for inpatient monitoring quickly become cost-ineffective, especially with relatively low rates of salvage. Surgeons should avoid extended hospitalizations for replant monitoring and should pursue enhanced recovery protocols for replantation, especially considering burgeoning health care costs in the United States. Economic/Decision Analysis III.

Digital Replantations: Comparison Veins Anastomoses first versus Arteries Anastomoses first.

This retrospective study analyses the effect performing veins anastomoses before arteries anastomoses in digital replantation. 38 adult patients with replantation of 12 thumbs and 39 fingers, in whom the veins anastomoses were performed prior to the arteries anastomoses, were compared with 29 patients with replantation of 9 thumbs and 30 fingers, in whom the arteries anastomoses were done first, with respect to the survival rate, total active motion, grip strength, and duration of the replantation. There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to the survival rates, total active motion, and grip strength, while the duration of the replantation was significantly shorter in patients, in whom the veins anastomoses were performed prior to the arteries anastomoses (2 hours and 50 minutes versus 3 hours and 42 minutes; p < 0.001). Performing veins anastomoses before arteries anastomoses in digital replantations reduces the replantation time significantly without influencing the survival rate and the clinical outcome.

Single Digit Index Finger Amputation-To Replant or Not?

Background: Single index finger replantation is often listed as a contraindication due to its hindrance of hand function when replanted. Recent studies demonstrate comparable subjective and global functional outcomes for index flexor zone II finger replants versus revision amputations. We therefore sought to identify current opinions of plastic surgery trainees and staff treating single index finger zone II amputations including influential patient and injury characteristics. Methods: With the approval of the Canadian Society of Plastic Surgery, a 17-question survey was sent via email to all listed members on 3 separate occasions. Participation was voluntary and survey responses were compiled and analyzed using SPSS statistical software. Results: Survey response rate was 38.5%. When asked whether the surgeon would replant a single index digit, flexor zone II, sharp amputation, 55.3% of respondents chose "yes," while 44.7% responded "no." Staff (51.5%) were less likely to replant a single index digit amputation. Likelihood of replant dropped substantially in crush (12.4%) and avulsion (17.1%) injury. Smoking was the most likely patient characteristic to change a surgeon's decision (61.9%). Poor range of motion (77.5%) and patient satisfaction (72.5%) were the most frequently listed reasons not to replant. Conclusion: Among Canadian plastic surgeons, there exists disagreement in how single index flexor zone II amputations should be managed. In review of the literature, these notions and previous teaching around replants highlight many inherent surgeon biases with regard to the merit and value of single digit replantation.

A 17-Year Experience in Hand and Digit Replantation at an Academic Center.

of replantation surgery following upper extremity traumatic amputation are extensively described in the literature, with success rates varying from 57 to 100 percent. The purpose of this study was to evaluate replantation success rate at a Level I trauma center over a 17-year period and to assess definable factors contributing to these results. A retrospective review of all digit and hand replantations at a Level I trauma center was performed using CPT codes from 2001 through 2018. Descriptive analyses, Mann-Whitney test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and logistic regressions were used. Significance was defined as p ≤ 0.05. Analysis consisted of 76 patients with 101 amputated parts (93 digits and eight hands). Fifty-six single digit amputations (30 percent success rate), 37 multidigit injuries (22 percent digit success rate), and eight hand amputations (50 percent success rate) were attempted. The overall success rate was 25 of 76 patients (33 percent) and 29 of 101 parts (29 percent). The most common mechanism of injury was laceration (n = 56), followed by crush (n = 30), and avulsion (n = 11), with repair of laceration-type injuries having the greatest success rate (36 percent). The authors report a lower success rate of hand and digit replantation than previously described in the literature. Whole hand and thumb replantations resulted in the highest survival rate in our series. Laceration mechanism showed a higher success rate than crush or avulsion-type injuries. The authors' modest results highlight the importance of effective internal auditing of low-volume replantation centers such as their own. Quality improvement measures are proposed for higher future success in replantation surgery at the authors' institution. Therapeutic, IV.

Artery-Only Fingertip Replantation Distal to the Lunula: A Retrospective Analysis of Clinical Results.

Background: Both arterial and venous repair are crucial for optimal results in digital replantation. However, anastomosis of veins becomes challenging in very distal fingertip amputation. This study aimed to report the clinical results of an artery-only replantation without vein repair for a distal fingertip amputation and to analyze the survival rate and clinical outcomes based on the amputation level. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 47 digits in 38 patients who had undergone fingertip replantation with a mean follow-up period of 12 months. All patients had complete fingertip amputation distal to the lunula. Only one central artery repair distal to the arch was performed. All patients received the postoperative protocol including external bleeding and anticoagulation therapy. Results: By Ishilawa's classification, 12 digits in subzone I, and 35 digits in subzone II. 31 of the 47 fingertip replantations (66%) were successful, and a significantly higher survival rate was observed in subzone I than in subzone II. The mean total active motion of surviving digits was 86% of normal side. The mean grip strength was 82% of normal side. The sensory recovery according to modified Highet and Saunders' classification was S4, S3+, S3, and S2 in fingers 19, 2, 5 and 3, respectively. Conclusions: 66% of survival rate was achieved in fingertip replantation distal to lunula which including large number of crushing/avulsion injury. The result of comparison for the survival rate based on amputation level, a significantly higher survival rate was observed in subzone I compared to subzone II. Therefore, the artery-only fingertip replantation had a better indication for distal amputation, and an aggressive attempt for venous anastomosis or drainage, including a secondary surgery for proximal amputation could be attributed to a higher success rate.

Comparative outcome analysis of osseointegrated reconstruction and replantation for digital amputations.

The long-term outcomes of osseointegration for digital amputations are not well established, and it is not known whether osseointegration can achieve similar function and patient satisfaction to conventional surgical options such as replantation and microsurgical toe transfer. We compared the long-term outcomes after digital osseointegration and replantation. Six patients treated by osseointegration and seven patients treated by replantation were included, with median follow-ups of 8 years and 4.6 years, respectively. Outcomes were assessed using the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire, grip and pinch strength, range of motion, two-point discrimination, Semmes-Weinstein tests, Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test and clinical photography. Osseointegration was associated with poorer sensibility and range of motion than replantation; no other differences reached statistical significance. Long-term osseointegration is a safe and effective reconstructive option that can deliver excellent outcomes in appropriately selected patients.Level of evidence: IV.

Postoperative Digit and Hand Replantation Protocols: A Review of the Literature.

Successful replantation and revascularization of the hand and digit require a skilled team with urgent access to an operating room with microsurgical capabilities. Although careful indications and surgical techniques contribute to success, postoperative management also plays a vital role in the survival of a replanted digit. Previous research has assessed surgical efficiency and techniques to conduct these procedures, but few studies evaluate postoperative protocols to care for patients undergoing these procedures. Because of the lack of high-level evidence specific to replantation, many common postoperative practices related to monitoring, anticoagulation, and diet have been inferred from elective microsurgical procedures, despite notable differences in operating conditions. The highest level of evidence pertaining to digital replantation was found with the use of peripheral nerve blockade, leeching/bleeding, and nicotine use. This review provides an in-depth evaluation of the literature and insight into the rationale and level of evidence that support each postoperative intervention. It highlights institutional variability and a paucity of high-level evidence pertaining to this topic while identifying the areas of future research.

Determinants of Success in Single- and Multi-Digit Replant.

Purpose: Understanding the variables that influence success in digital replant surgery is essential to guide clinical decision-making and to counsel patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the replant success rate and identify predictors of success at our tertiary care centre. Methods: This was a single centre, retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent digital replantation from January 2000 to September 2018. Adult patients with flexor zone I to III amputations were included. Patient demographics, comorbidities, injury pattern, operative data, and post-operative care were reviewed. The primary outcome was survival of the replanted digit at discharge. Results: A total of 146 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 100 had single-digit replants and 46 underwent multi-digit replants for a total of 220 digits. The success rate was 71%. Predictors of success included sharp mechanism of injury (P < .01), incomplete amputation (P < .01), amputation proximal to zone I flexor level (P = .02), post-operative acetylsalicylic acid use (P < .01), absence of leech use (P = .05), and absence of operative re-exploration (P < .01). Daytime replants had similar outcome compared to nighttime replants despite having increased ischemia time (7.9 ± 3.9 hours vs 6.8 ± 2.6 hours, P = .02). However, daytime operative time (7.8 ± 3.7 hours) was significantly shorter than nighttime replant time (9.6 ± 5.9 hours, P = .01). Conclusion: Sharp amputation, intact venous drainage, proximal amputation, and acetylsalicylic acid use were associated with replant survival and are factors to consider when managing patients for digital replantation. Leech therapy and operative re-exploration were associated with poor outcome. Nighttime replants required significantly longer operative time than daytime replants despite similar survival outcome.

Geospatial Inefficiencies Associated With Digital Replantations at High-Volume Centers and Optimal Allocation Model for Centralization of Replantations

Digit replantation can improve dexterity, functionality, patient satisfaction, and pain following amputation, but rates continue to fall nationally. This study aimed to describe the effects of travel time and distance as barriers to high-volume hospitals, identify geospatial inefficiencies in the presentation of patients to replantation care, and provide an optimal allocation model in which cases are redistributed to select centers to reduce geospatial redundancies and optimize outcomes. We reviewed the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development hospital discharge database to identify cases of digital amputation and determine outcomes of replantation. Using residential zip codes, risk- and reliability-adjusted multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the relationship of hospital volume and travel time on replantation success. Geospatial analysis assessed the travel burden of patients as they presented for care, and optimal allocation modeling was used to create a model of centralization. We identified 5,503 patients during the study period; 1,060 underwent replantation with an overall success rate of 70.2%. Ninety-three hospitals were found to perform replantations, of which only 4 were identified as high-volume hospitals. Patients routinely traveled farther to reach high-volume hospitals, and decreasing the travel time predicted a 15% increase in odds of replantation at a low-volume center. Twenty-one percent of patients presented to a low-volume hospital when a high-volume hospital was closer, and differencein payer type and race/ethnicity existed between those who presented to the closest center compared to those who bypassed high-volume centers. The optimal allocation modeling allocated all cases into 8 centers, which increased the median annual volume from 1 case to 9.6 cases and decreased patient travel time. Travel burden and geospatial inefficiencies serve as barriers to high-quality and high-volume replantation services. Optimized allocation of digital replantation cases into high-quality centers can decrease travel times, increase annual volumes, and potentially improve replantation outcomes. Economic/Decision Analysis III.

Digit Replantation Outcomes at High-Volume Hospitals

Digit Replantation Outcomes at High-Volume Hospitals

Results of central ray metacarpal resection after failure of digit replantation in children

Central ray amputation results severe esthetic blemish and functional and psychological sequelae. Three main reconstruction procedures have been reported in adults: digital translocation, intracarpal osteotomy, and metacarpal resection; none of these, however, have been studied in children. The aim of this study was to report medium-term results for treatment of central ray amputation by proximal metacarpal resection following failure of digit replantation in children (i.e., skeletally immature patients). All children consecutively operated on by metacarpal resection after failure of digit replantation for complete central ray amputation between 2012 and December 2017 were retrospectively included. The surgical procedure consisted in metacarpal resection through a palmar approach, with deep transverse metacarpal ligament reconstruction. At last follow-up, adjacent finger range of motion, pain, rotational deformity and grip strength were evaluated, as well as metacarpal laxity. Metacarpal migration index and metacarpal divergence were measured on standard X-ray. Eleven children with a mean age of 11 ± 8 years were included. At mean 18 ± 3 months’ follow-up, range of motion in adjacent digits was conserved in all cases, with no intermetacarpal laxity. Grip strength was 28% lower than for the contralateral side. Two patients showed rotational malalignment in extension, without functional impairment. In 4th ray amputation (n = 8), metacarpal migration index was decreased by 65% due to radial migration of the 5th metacarpal, but metacarpal divergence was conserved in all cases. Isolated metacarpal resection of the central ray for replantation failure is a reliable and safe procedure with good radiological and functional results in skeletally immature children.

Patient outcomes and costs after isolated flexor tendon repairs of the hand

BackgroundAcute flexor tendon injuries are challenging injuries for patients, surgeons, and therapists alike. There is ongoing debate about the optimal timing and amount of therapy after these injuries. PurposeWe sought to investigate the relationship between hand therapy utilization and reoperation rates after flexor tendon repair and quantify reoperation rates and costs associated with flexor tendon repair. We hypothesize there will be an inverse relationship between the number of hand therapy visits and later reoperation rates and a positive correlation between reoperation rates and total cost of care. Study DesignA retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing primary flexor tendon repair was pursued. MethodsA commercially available database was utilized to access insurance claims data for 20.9 million patients in the US from 2007 to 2015. Patients undergoing primary flexor tendon repair were included and followed for one year. Patients with fractures, vascular injuries, or digit replantation were excluded. We studied post-operative rehabilitation utilization, reoperation rates, and costs. Chi-Square tests and multivariable logistic regressions were used to assess the relationship between therapy utilization and reoperation rates and costs. ResultsThe one-year reoperation rate was 11.4 percent at a median time of 100.0 days amongst 1,129 patients undergoing primary tendon repair. In multivariable analysis, age between 30 and 59, male sex, and utilization of over 21 therapy sessions were associated with increased odds of reoperation. Mean insurance reimbursement one year following primary flexor repair was $14,533 per patient but $27,870 if patients went on to reoperation. ConclusionContinued therapy utilization after primary flexor tendon repair is an independent predictor of reoperation need. These findings may help surgeons counsel patients who require a large number of visits after flexor tendon repair on when to revisit surgical options.

National Population Study of the Effect of Structure and Process on Outcomes of Digit Replantation

Surgeon experience, hospital volume, and teaching hospital status may play a role in the success of digit replantation. This study aims to analyze factors that influence digit replantation success rates. We examined patients with traumatic digit amputations, between 2000 and 2015, from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) of Taiwan, which comprises data of more than 99% of its population. We measured the number of traumatic digit amputations and success rate of replantation. Chi-square and ANOVA tests were used for descriptive statistics. Regression models were built to analyze the association among patient, surgeon, and hospital characteristics, and replant success. We identified 13,416 digit replantation patients using the eligibility criteria. The overall replantation failure rate was significantly higher in medium- and high-volume hospitals (low-volume: 11%, medium-volume: 17%, and high-volume: 15%, p < 0.001). Teaching hospitals had significantly higher replantation failure rates [(15.5% vs 7.6%), odds ratio (OR) 2.0; confidence interval (CI) 1.1-3.7]. Lower surgeon case volume resulted in a significantly higher failure rate in the thumb replantation (OR 0.89; CI 0.85-0.94). Teaching hospitals had greater odds of replantation failure, owing to being high volume centers and attempting more replantations. However, the effect of residents performing the replantation during their training should be considered. Teaching units are mandatory for resident training; however, a balance should be established to provide training, but with sufficient supervision to achieve optimal replant success. A national protocol to triage digit amputation cases to high volume centers with experienced microsurgeons will help improve the replantation success rate.

Comparing digital replantation versus revision amputation patient reported outcomes for traumatic digital amputations of the hand: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Adults with traumatic digital amputation (TDA) of the hand may be managed with replantation or revision amputation. To date, there is no systematic review evaluating patient reported outcomes (PROs) comparing replantation versus revision amputation. Three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed) were systematically searched in duplicate from inception until June 13, 2019 using Covidence software. Studies comparing replantation versus revision amputation outcomes were considered for inclusion. Methodological quality was assessed using Methodologic Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. Data were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis model using Revman software. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE). Of 4350 studies identified, 12 retrospective cohort studies met inclusion criteria and compared TDA outcomes for replantation (n = 717; 82.9% male; mean age 40.3) versus revision amputation (n = 1046; 79.8% male; mean age 41.7). The overall replantation survival rate was 85.3%. The average MINORS score was 57% (13.75/24). Replantation of the thumb had a superior Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) score (+11.88, 95% CI [7.78-15.99], I2 = 21%) compared with revision amputation. Replantation of single non-thumb digits had a superior MHQ score (+5.31, 95% CI [3.10-7.51], I2 = 67%) and Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score (-5.16, 95% CI [-8.27 to -2.06], I2 = 0%) compared with revision amputation. Most patients in the meta-analysis were from Asian populations (87.9%). There is low-quality evidence that thumb replantation achieves superior PROs compared with revision amputation, which may be clinically important. Replantation of single non-thumb digits also yielded superior PROs, which is likely not clinically important and based on very low-quality evidence. Future studies with populations outside Asia are required to determine if PROs vary based on cultural differences toward digital amputation.

Letter to the Editor Regarding Errors in 2006 Review Titled “A Meta-Analysis of Success Rates for Digit Replantation”

Letter to the Editor Regarding Errors in 2006 Review Titled “A Meta-Analysis of Success Rates for Digit Replantation”

Digit Replantation Practice: A Comparison of Three Rat Models

Digit replantation is a complex surgery that nearly always needs to be done as an emergency. As such it is often difficult to teach. Several models have been developed to train surgeons in this procedure. We compare three rat models of replantation with the aim of ascertaining which most simulates the digit replantation. Inbred albino rats were selected and divided into three groups of 13 each, tail, penile, and hind replant groups. Three rats in each group were anesthetized, the specific amputation injury is created and is replanted for the anatomic component of the study. For the comparative section, 10 animals were anesthesized and the amputated parts were replanted under standard conditions. The parameters measured included weight, vessels and nerve diameters, method of fixation, total ischemia and replant times, the patency rates (after operation and at one week post surgery), as well as postoperative complications. All rats survived in the procedure. There was patency in all groups immediately. Rat tail group had 90%, penile group 100%, and hind limb group 90% survival 1 week after the replantation. There was one mortality in the hind limb group. The penile replant group was the shortest (p < 0.001), and all vessel sizes were comparable except the central artery of the tail which was significantly smaller (p < 0.001). The processes of the hind limb group most simulated the human digit replant procedure, though the ischemia and total replant times are significantly longer (p < 0.005). Though the immediate and 1 week patency rates were similar in all three groups, the hind limb replantation model involved steps most similar to human digit replant surgery and is recommended as the preferred teaching model.

Effect of Hospital Characteristics on Performance of Pediatric Digit Replantation in the United States

Introduction Utilize a national pediatric database to assess whether hospital characteristics such as location, teaching status, ownership, or size impact the performance of pediatric digit replantation following traumatic digit amputation in the United States.Materials and Methods The Kid's Inpatient Database (KID) was used to query pediatric traumatic digit amputations between 2000 and 2012. Ownership (private and public), teaching status (teaching and non-teaching), location (urban and rural), hospital type (general and children's), and size (large and small-medium) characteristics were evaluated. Replantations were then divided into those that required subsequent revision replantation or amputation. Fisher's exact tests and multivariable logistic regressions were performed with p <0.05 considered statistically significant.Results Overall, 1,015 pediatric patients were included for the digit replantation cohort. Hospitals that were privately owned, general, large, urban, or teaching had a significantly greater number of replantations than small-medium, rural, non-teaching, public, or children's hospitals. Privately owned (odds ratio [OR]: 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06–3.06; p = 0.03) and urban (OR: 2.29; 95% CI: 1.41–3.73; p = 0.005) hospitals were significantly more likely to perform replantation. Urban (OR: 4.02; 95% CI: 1.90–8.47; p = 0.0003) and teaching (OR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.17–3.83; p = 0.014) hospitals were significantly more likely to perform a revision procedure following primary replantation.Conclusion Private and urban hospitals were significantly more likely to perform replantation, but urban and teaching hospitals carried a greater number of revision procedures following replantation. Despite risk of requiring revision, the treatment of pediatric digit amputations in private, urban, and teaching centers provide the greatest likelihood for an attempt at replantation in the pediatric population. The study shows Level of Evidence III.

Classification and clinical evaluation of "spare parts" procedures in mutilating hand injuries

Mutilating hand injuries are common, and reconstruction should be tailored to each case. The “spare parts” concept relies on harvesting tissues for reconstruction from amputated or non-salvageable parts that are being discarded. This study sought to evaluate the outcomes of “spare parts” procedures in mutilating hand injuries and to propose a classification of “spare parts” types. This study included 28 patients with mutilating hand injuries undergoing surgery using “spare parts” for tissue reconstruction either at the time of trauma or later on. A total of 31 “spare parts” procedures were performed on the 28 patients. The outcomes were assessed in terms of reconstruction success, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, grip strength, and an overall patient satisfaction score that we designed. Reconstruction using “spare parts” was successful in 25 patients (89%). The mean DASH score was 8.45 ± 4.74, the mean grip strength was 24.57 ± 2.73 kg, and overall patient satisfaction was 3.32 ± 0.77 out of 5. Specific outcomes were assessed using case-specific measures. Based on these data, a hand-specific classification of “spare parts” procedures was designed to be taken into consideration when managing mutilating hand injuries. Besides direct digital replantation and tissue harvesting from different donor sites, the “spare parts” concept is an important tool for a hand surgeon. Its different types should always be taken into consideration when managing mutilating hand injuries to avoid additional donor site morbidities and to achieve a high level of overall patient satisfaction. We propose adding a “patient satisfaction with hand appearance” item to the DASH and QuickDASH score.

Analysis of Outcomes of Tamai Zone I Digital Replantation in Cases of Severe Crushing Injury

Purpose: Digital replantation has dramatically changed the fate of mutilated injuries of hand. But in case of severe crushing injury in Tamai zone I, it is a contraindication of replantation. This study aims to determine the replantation survival rate in cases with crushing injury.Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients’ charts and photos from January 2015 to December 2019. There were 294 patients (331 fingers) with digital amputation who underwent surgery. Cases with crushing were divided into petechiae-in-skin group and red-line-sign group and compared with the group without crushing. The relationship of survival rate with factors was evaluated using chi-square analysis.Results: Of these, 199 fingers were defined as severe crushed, and 140 cases with petechiae in skin and 59 cases with red line sign. There was no statistically significant difference in survival rate compared with the group without crushing (p=0.227). Additional surgery was performed more in crushed injury. However, necrotized soft tissue was mainly on margin of amputation, not on crushed area.Conclusion: The presence of crushing did not affect survival rate in Tamai zone I replantation. However, as the degree of crushing was severe, the need for additional surgery increased. We found that the number of anastomosed arteries and veins influences the survival rate. According to our analysis, even if it’s difficult, finding and doing anastomosis as many vessels as possible can make good results.

Comparing Digital Replantation Versus Revision Amputation Patient-reported Outcomes for Traumatic Digital Amputations of the Hand: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Purpose Adults with traumatic digital amputation (TDA) of the hand may be managed with replantation or revision amputation. To date, there is no systematic review evaluating patient reported outcomes (PROs) comparing replantation versus revision amputation. Methods Three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed) were systematically searched in duplicate from inception until June 13, 2019 using Covidence software. Studies comparing replantation versus revision amputation outcomes were considered for inclusion. Methodological quality was assessed using Methodologic Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. Data were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis model using Revman software. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE). Results Of 4350 studies identified, 12 retrospective cohort studies met inclusion criteria and compared TDA outcomes for replantation (n = 717; 82.9% male; mean age 40.3) versus revision amputation (n = 1046; 79.8% male; mean age 41.7). The overall replantation survival rate was 85.3%. The average MINORS score was 57% (13.75/24). Replantation of the thumb had a superior Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) score (+11.88, 95% CI [7.78-15.99], I2 = 21%) compared with revision amputation. Replantation of single non-thumb digits had a superior MHQ score (+5.31, 95% CI [3.10-7.51], I2 = 67%) and Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score (-5.16, 95% CI [-8.27 to -2.06], I2 = 0%) compared with revision amputation. Most patients in the meta-analysis were from Asian populations (87.9%). Conclusion There is low-quality evidence that thumb replantation achieves superior PROs compared with revision amputation, which may be clinically important. Replantation of single non-thumb digits also yielded superior PROs, which is likely not clinically important and based on very low-quality evidence. Future studies with populations outside Asia are required to determine if PROs vary based on cultural differences toward digital amputation.