Accelerated Flap Coverage in Severe Lower Extremity Trauma

Infection following severe lower extremity musculoskeletal injuries is a challenging problem. Several factors hypothesized to influence infection have been explored and, in many cases, optimized or found not to be influential. A persistent area of uncertainty and variability is the timing of acute soft tissue coverage. In the United States, the mean time to coverage from injury is 10 days, and infection rates are 20-35%. In the United Kingdom, there are national guidelines to support coverage within 72 hours of injury, and infection rates are less than 10%. While the data to support early coverage is promising, the necessary evidence to make this significant change is lacking. To justify the mobilization of resources and expense required to shift practice, a definitive trial is needed. This trial seeks to fill this critical knowledge gap.

The primary objective of this trial is to determine if accelerated flap coverage (within 72 hours of injury) compared to standard flap coverage timing leads lower rates of infection and infection-related complications. The trial population includes patients 18 years and older with an acute open fracture and/or dislocation below the knee, with a diagnosed need for acute soft tissue coverage with a flap. Patients who undergo primary amputation prior to attempted flap coverage will be excluded. There will be 356 participants randomized in 1:1 ratio to receive either accelerated flap coverage (goal of flap within 72 hours from injury) or flap coverage at the time that reflects the standard of care at each institution. The timing of the trial interventions, other adjunctive treatments, the fracture fixation, and flap coverage procedures will be documented for both treatment groups. Management of the fracture or dislocation, selection of flap, and post-injury flap management will be at the discretion of the operating surgeons and documented for both treatment groups. Participants will have follow-up at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months post-randomization.

The primary outcome will be a composite outcome to evaluate clinical status 6 months after randomization. Components of the composite outcome will be hierarchically assessed in the following order: 1) all-cause mortality, 2) amputation related to injury, 3) re-operation for infection and/or flap complication (flap compromise, partial and/or complete flap failure), and 4) days in hospital, defined as days in an acute in-patient hospital (i.e., not rehab or nursing facility). The secondary outcomes will independently assess the individual components of the primary outcome at 6 and 12 months, the composite outcome at 12 months, and health-related quality of life and patient satisfaction over 6 and 12 months. An Adjudication Committee will review primary and secondary endpoints and a Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) will review all safety events.

The inclusion criteria are:

• Patients 18 years of age or older.
• Severe lower extremity open fracture and/or dislocation below the knee requiring an acute flap for management of the musculoskeletal injury.
• Will have all planned flap surgeries performed by a participating surgeon or delegate.
• Able to be randomized within 48 hours of injury.

The exclusion criteria are:

• Site is unable to implement the accelerated flap protocol due to local logistics.
• Primary amputation anticipated prior to attempted flap for management of the injury.
• Critical limb ischemia that requires re-vascularization for limb perfusion.
• Chronic or acute infection at or near the musculoskeletal injury site at the time of initial injury surgery.
• Burns at the musculoskeletal injury site.
• Incarceration.
• Expected injury survival of less than 12 months.
• Terminal illness with expected survival of less than 12 months.
• Currently enrolled in a trial that does not permit co-enrollment.
• Declined to provide informed consent.
• Unable to obtain informed consent due to language barriers.
• Unable to obtain informed consent because a legally authorized representative was unavailable.
• Anticipated problems, in the judgment of research personnel, with maintaining follow-up with the patient.
• Prior enrollment in the trial.
• Eligible patient or LAR was not approached within screening window (missed participant).
• Other reason to exclude the patient, as approved by the Principal Investigators.