ClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT05435261Updated Aug 18, 2022

Ganga Hospital Scoring System In Type-IIIA/B Open Tibial Fractures

An observational study in Fractures, Open, sponsored by Assiut University. Status unknown. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-08-18.

Sponsored by Assiut University · Observational

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Aug 2022), so the status shown — last known as Not yet recruiting — may be out of date.
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
87
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The aim of this study is to assess interobserver reliability, sensitivity for amputation, and specificity for salvage of GHS in type-III injuries with open tibial fractures and predict the potential number of inpatient days, secondary procedures that would be required, and the rate of infection

Read the detailed description

Open fractures are usually high-energy injuries that can lead to life-threatening multiple injuries. It is classified as an orthopaedic emergency, and successful treatment depends on a thorough assessment and prompt treatment of the patient and wound. With the rise in severe open tibia injuries, an ideal scoring system with high specificity and sensitivity for predicting limb salvage is required. A misdiagnosis can lead to unnecessary amputations or salvage operations. A variety of scoring methods have been described for limb salvaging. The Gustilo and Anderson classification system is still the most used. Following the original classification, typeIII injuries were subdivided into type-IIIA, which denoted adequate soft-tissue coverage of the fracture despite extensive skin loss, type-IIIB, which denoted extensive soft-tissue loss, periosteal stripping, and bone exposure; and type-IIIC, which denoted an open fracture with an associated arterial injury that required repair. It has the limitations of a low intra and inter-observer agreement rate, low specificity and sensitivity to salvage and ambulation, and an inability to predict functional results in the care of Type IIIB injuries. The Ganga Hospital Score (GHS) is an open injury score developed from a high-volume trauma center that treats more than 600 open lower-limb fractures each year, far higher than a typical major trauma center in the United Kingdom. Following three clinical trials, the score was developed and has been shown to accurately predict whether a limb can be saved or must be amputated. The scoring system's nature, which takes into account particular injuries to the bone, skin, and musculotendinous units, as well as comorbid factors, has also been expanded to advise wound treatment. In medicine, scoring systems are used to rate the severity of an illness, predict the outcome, and aid in management decisions. In open injuries, an ideal score would have a sensitivity of 100%, with all limbs requiring amputation scoring at or above the threshold value, and a specificity of 100%, with all limbs that can be preserved scoring below the threshold value. Because these injuries are frequently complex clinical conditions, this is challenging to achieve. Although it is preferable to err on the side of high specificity such that only a small percentage of salvageable limbs score over the amputation threshold, high sensitivity is also necessary to limit the number of secondary amputations.

02

Conditions studied

  • Fractures, Open

Browse trials for

03

In context

Fractures, Open

53 studies on the registry are indexed under Fractures, Open; 14 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 87 is close to the median of 93 across 13 observational studies indexed under Fractures, Open.

Browse Fractures, Open studies →

Lead sponsor

Assiut University is the lead sponsor of 5,078 studies on the registry; 2,178 are open to participants now.

Of its 14 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

trauma patient with open tibial fractures type-IIIA/B

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • All patients aged more than 17 years
  • open fractures of the tibia irrespective of the fracture site, presenting within 24 h of injury type-IIIA/B

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with Gustilo and Anderson types I, II, and IIIC injuries.
  • complete traumatic amputations.
  • patients who had initial debridement at an outside hospital.
  • those with an age group less than 17 years
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
87 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Group I

    with a score below 14

    Procedure: Debridement with Ex_Fix (salvage)

  • Group II

    with a score above 14

    Procedure: BKA

Interventions

  • ProcedureBKA

    Below Knee Amputation: * Under spinal anesthesia * BKA * closure in layers (terminal closure) with suction drain.

  • ProcedureDebridement with Ex_Fix (salvage)

    Debridement and External Fixation (salvage): * Under spinal anesthesia * wound debridement and wash. * external fixation.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. sensitivity and specificity GHS in type- IIIA/B open tibial fractures

    salvage with score below 14 and Amputation with score above 14

    Time frame: one year

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Griffin M, Malahias M, Khan W, Hindocha S. Update on the management of open lower limb fractures. Open Orthop J. 2012;6:571-7. doi: 10.2174/1874325001206010571. Epub 2012 Nov 30. PubMed 23248730 ↗
  • Gustilo RB, Anderson JT. Prevention of infection in the treatment of one thousand and twenty-five open fractures of long bones: retrospective and prospective analyses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976 Jun;58(4):453-8. PubMed 773941 ↗
  • Kumar KN, Shivanna HYS, Kumar TNS, Pratheeksh. Assessment of Ganga Hospital Open Injury Severity Score of Limbs. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2020 Oct-Dec;13(4):317-318. doi: 10.4103/JETS.JETS_68_20. Epub 2020 Dec 7. No abstract available. PubMed 33897152 ↗
  • Rajasekaran S, Naresh Babu J, Dheenadhayalan J, Shetty AP, Sundararajan SR, Kumar M, Rajasabapathy S. A score for predicting salvage and outcome in Gustilo type-IIIA and type-IIIB open tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Oct;88(10):1351-60. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B10.17631. PubMed 17012427 ↗
  • Rajasekaran S, Sabapathy SR. A philosophy of care of open injuries based on the Ganga hospital score. Injury. 2007 Feb;38(2):137-46. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.04.135. Epub 2006 Sep 6. PubMed 16950263 ↗
  • Al-Hourani K, Stoddart M, Khan U, Riddick A, Kelly M. Orthoplastic reconstruction of type IIIB open tibial fractures retaining debrided devitalized cortical segments: the Bristol experience 2014 to 2018. Bone Joint J. 2019 Aug;101-B(8):1002-1008. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B8.BJJ-2018-1526.R2. PubMed 31362546 ↗
  • Messner J, Johnson L, Taylor DM, Harwood P, Britten S, Foster P. Treatment and functional outcomes of complex tibial fractures in children and adolescents using the Ilizarov method. Bone Joint J. 2018 Mar 1;100-B(3):396-403. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B3.BJJ-2017-0863.R1. PubMed 29589503 ↗
  • Venkatadass K, Grandhi TSP, Rajasekaran S. Use of Ganga Hospital Open Injury Severity Scoring for determination of salvage versus amputation in open type IIIB injuries of lower limbs in children-An analysis of 52 type IIIB open fractures. Injury. 2017 Nov;48(11):2509-2514. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.09.010. Epub 2017 Sep 12. PubMed 28918873 ↗
  • Shanmuganathan R. The utility of scores in the decision to salvage or amputation in severely injured limbs. Indian J Orthop. 2008 Oct;42(4):368-76. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.43371. PubMed 19753223 ↗
  • Rajasekaran S, Sabapathy SR, Dheenadhayalan J, Sundararajan SR, Venkatramani H, Devendra A, Ramesh P, Srikanth KP. Ganga hospital open injury score in management of open injuries. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2015 Feb;41(1):3-15. doi: 10.1007/s00068-014-0465-9. Epub 2014 Nov 6. PubMed 26038161 ↗
  • Durham RM, Mistry BM, Mazuski JE, Shapiro M, Jacobs D. Outcome and utility of scoring systems in the management of the mangled extremity. Am J Surg. 1996 Nov;172(5):569-73; discussion 573-4. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9610(96)00245-0. PubMed 8942565 ↗
  • Caudle RJ, Stern PJ. Severe open fractures of the tibia. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987 Jul;69(6):801-7. PubMed 3597491 ↗
  • Madhuchandra P, Rafi M, Devadoss S, Devadoss A. Predictability of salvage and outcome of Gustilo and Anderson type-IIIA and type-IIIB open tibial fractures using Ganga Hospital Scoring system. Injury. 2015 Feb;46(2):282-7. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2014.11.003. Epub 2014 Nov 15. PubMed 25482348 ↗
09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Start is estimated for Dec 2022; primary completion for May 2023, 5 months later.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jun 23, 2022
First posted
Jun 28, 2022
StartEst.
Dec 1, 2022
Primary completionEst.
May 2023
CompletionEst.
May 2024
Last update
Aug 18, 2022
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 18, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05435261
Lead sponsor
Assiut University
Responsible party
Mohamed Mahmoud Abdelkarem (Director, Assiut University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 28, 2022
Start date
Dec 1, 2022 (estimated)
Primary completion
May 2023 (estimated)
Completion
May 2024 (estimated)
Last update
Aug 18, 2022

Study contacts

Mohamed Mahmoud Abdelkarem, M.B.B.CH
Contact
Mohamed.20134306@med.au.edu.eg
01017781468
Ali Mohamadean Mohamed, Professor
study chair · Prof. Dr
Hossam Mohamed Abubeih, Assistant Professor
study director · Ass. Prof. Dr

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Aug 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion