Introduction
High-pressure injection injury is relatively rare, but it can lead to severe consequences such as soft tissue necrosis, infection, and eventual amputation, all of which result in functional impairment [
1,
2]. The incidence of high-pressure paint gun injection injury is increasing with the development of industry and the increase in the use of paint guns [
3]. High-pressure paint gun can produce pressure from 2000 up to 12,000 pounds per square inch (psi). Devastating injuries can be expected from these traumas, considering that a pressure of 100 psi is sufficient to breach the skin surface [
2]. The most commonly injected materials are paint and grease, but also include paint solvents, fuel oil, water, air, and even animal vaccines [
4]. The injury usually occurs on the non-dominant hand because the injection device is held by the dominant hand [
4,
5]. High-pressure paint gun injuries are initially treated with administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics and tetanus toxoid, while surgical intervention, including wide debridement, should be performed promptly after appropriate initial evaluation and management. Here, we present three cases of high-pressure injection injury by paint gun, which were treated at our institution, and conducted an in-depth review of relevant literature.
Discussion
Since the first high-pressure injection injury by paint gun was reported in 1963, the incidence of these injuries has increased with the development of techniques and industry [
6]. According to Verhoeven and Hierner [
7], one in every 600 hand traumas relates to high-pressure injection injury, and one to four people visit large-scale hospitals for similar injection traumas per year. The number of male patients (70.7%) is more than double that of female patients (29.3%) [
4]. Moreover, some studies have reported that the index finger was the most common location of injection injury to the hand, followed by the middle finger and palm [
2,
4].
Paint and grease are commonly used in high-pressure hand tools, although other materials, such as solvent, fuel oil, cement, water, air, and even animal vaccines, can also be used in these tools. It is important to identify the injected material because it can affect the progress from the surgical debridement and healing stages [
2,
4]. For instance, injuries from organic solvents have a higher amputation rate (>40%) [
2,
4]. The intense inflammatory response that promotes vasospasm and rapid tissue necrosis is considered to be the main mechanism of poor prognosis. Primary amputation can also be proposed to deal with paint injection injuries [
2]. Indeed, the injection pressure is correlated with the amputation rate. According to Schoo et al. [
8], the amputation rate increases when the injection pressure is more than 1,000 psi, but there is no pressure threshold for which amputation is inevitable. However, Verhoeven and Hierner [
7] reported that when the pressure is >7,100 psi, the amputation rate is 100%. Therefore, more specific questions about the paint gun’s injection pressure and even requesting for paint gun what the patient used are needed, because patients rarely remember or know their paint gun’s injection pressure.
Sequential tests should be conducted based on this information. Imaging findings are important to confirm the extent of injected materials before surgical intervention, while X-ray or CT can detect injected material according to the content of radiopaque leads [
5].
The timing of surgical intervention is the most critical factor affecting the prognosis of high-pressure injection injury [
1,
2,
4]. Wide surgical debridement should be performed in the early stage to deal with compartmental pressure, inflammatory responses, and infections [
2,
4]. The amputation rate has been reported as 40% when surgical debridement was completed within 6 hours, but increased when exceeding 6 hours, reaching up to 88% when surgery was delayed for more than a week [
4]. Surgical repair of defects after wide debridement is also important and can be performed using various methods, from direct closure to tissue transfer, depending on the defect size and status. Moreover, proper selection of the recipient vessel is essential for successful free flap transfer. To the best of our knowledge, the cause of failure was the proximity of the anastomosis to the injury zone. Recipient vessels should be sufficiently far from the zone of injury. The potentially traumatized recipients that are close or even near surroundings to the zone of injury can cause poor blood supply to the flap.
Inflammation of the tendon can cause adhesions and severe functional impairment, even in instances where primary removal of the injected material and surgical repair are performed. The average motion limits are 8° at the metacarpophalangeal joint, 24° at the proximal interphalangeal joint, and 30° at the distal interphalangeal joint [
4]. Therefore, sequential adhesiolysis or revision of tendons may be required following the primary procedure. Without doubt, rehabilitation management should be continued for improved hand function.
Here, we present three cases of high-pressure gun injury in males with water-soluble acryl paint injuries to the non-dominant hands. None of the patients underwent amputation, but flap failure was observed in a single case because of poor blood supply to the transferred flap, which was finally replaced with another free flap. These injuries are likely to be missed due to minor symptoms and relatively small wound sizes, which delays the timing of proper surgical intervention and can have fatal consequences. For these reasons, we report our experiences to contribute to the appropriate and satisfactory treatment of this condition.