Cargando…

Comparison between external fixation and pelvic binder in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability who underwent various haemostatic procedures

Haemostatic procedures such as preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP), pelvic angiography (PA), and internal iliac artery ligation are used for haemorrhage control in pelvic fracture patients with haemodynamic instability. Pelvic external fixation (PEF) and pelvic binder (PB) are usually applied with ha...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jang, Ji Young, Bae, Keum Soek, Kang, Byung Hee, Lee, Gil Jae
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8901771/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35256684
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-07694-3
_version_ 1784664444630990848
author Jang, Ji Young
Bae, Keum Soek
Kang, Byung Hee
Lee, Gil Jae
author_facet Jang, Ji Young
Bae, Keum Soek
Kang, Byung Hee
Lee, Gil Jae
author_sort Jang, Ji Young
collection PubMed
description Haemostatic procedures such as preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP), pelvic angiography (PA), and internal iliac artery ligation are used for haemorrhage control in pelvic fracture patients with haemodynamic instability. Pelvic external fixation (PEF) and pelvic binder (PB) are usually applied with haemostatic procedures to reduce the pelvic volume. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between patients who underwent PEF and PB. Among 173 patients with pelvic fracture admitted to the emergency room of three regional trauma centres between January 2015 and December 2018, the electronic charts of haemodynamically unstable patients were retrospectively analysed. Among the 84 patients included in the analysis, 20 underwent PEF with or without PB, and 64 underwent only PB. There were significant differences in tile classification and laparotomy between the PEF and PB groups (p = 0.023 and p = 0.032). PPP tended to be more frequently preformed in the PEF group (p = 0.054), whereas PA tended to be more commonly performed in the PB group than in the PEF group (p = 0.054). After propensity score matching to adjust for differences in patient characteristics and adjunct haemostatic procedure, there was no significant difference in 7-day, 30-day, and overall mortality rates between the PEF and PB groups (10.5% vs 21.1%, p = 0.660, 21.1% vs 26.3%, p = 1.000, and 26.3% vs 26.3%, p = 1.000). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis and multivariate analysis for correction of covariates (age, lactate, and abdominal injury) showed that PEF was not an independent factor for 30-day mortality compared with PB (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.526; 95% confidence interval, 0.092–3.002; p = 0.469). Among the volume reduction procedures performed with other haemostatic procedures in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability, PEF did not significantly reduce the 30-day mortality rate compared to PB.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8901771
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89017712022-03-08 Comparison between external fixation and pelvic binder in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability who underwent various haemostatic procedures Jang, Ji Young Bae, Keum Soek Kang, Byung Hee Lee, Gil Jae Sci Rep Article Haemostatic procedures such as preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP), pelvic angiography (PA), and internal iliac artery ligation are used for haemorrhage control in pelvic fracture patients with haemodynamic instability. Pelvic external fixation (PEF) and pelvic binder (PB) are usually applied with haemostatic procedures to reduce the pelvic volume. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between patients who underwent PEF and PB. Among 173 patients with pelvic fracture admitted to the emergency room of three regional trauma centres between January 2015 and December 2018, the electronic charts of haemodynamically unstable patients were retrospectively analysed. Among the 84 patients included in the analysis, 20 underwent PEF with or without PB, and 64 underwent only PB. There were significant differences in tile classification and laparotomy between the PEF and PB groups (p = 0.023 and p = 0.032). PPP tended to be more frequently preformed in the PEF group (p = 0.054), whereas PA tended to be more commonly performed in the PB group than in the PEF group (p = 0.054). After propensity score matching to adjust for differences in patient characteristics and adjunct haemostatic procedure, there was no significant difference in 7-day, 30-day, and overall mortality rates between the PEF and PB groups (10.5% vs 21.1%, p = 0.660, 21.1% vs 26.3%, p = 1.000, and 26.3% vs 26.3%, p = 1.000). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis and multivariate analysis for correction of covariates (age, lactate, and abdominal injury) showed that PEF was not an independent factor for 30-day mortality compared with PB (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.526; 95% confidence interval, 0.092–3.002; p = 0.469). Among the volume reduction procedures performed with other haemostatic procedures in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability, PEF did not significantly reduce the 30-day mortality rate compared to PB. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8901771/ /pubmed/35256684 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-07694-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Jang, Ji Young
Bae, Keum Soek
Kang, Byung Hee
Lee, Gil Jae
Comparison between external fixation and pelvic binder in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability who underwent various haemostatic procedures
title Comparison between external fixation and pelvic binder in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability who underwent various haemostatic procedures
title_full Comparison between external fixation and pelvic binder in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability who underwent various haemostatic procedures
title_fullStr Comparison between external fixation and pelvic binder in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability who underwent various haemostatic procedures
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between external fixation and pelvic binder in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability who underwent various haemostatic procedures
title_short Comparison between external fixation and pelvic binder in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability who underwent various haemostatic procedures
title_sort comparison between external fixation and pelvic binder in patients with pelvic fracture and haemodynamic instability who underwent various haemostatic procedures
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8901771/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35256684
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-07694-3
work_keys_str_mv AT jangjiyoung comparisonbetweenexternalfixationandpelvicbinderinpatientswithpelvicfractureandhaemodynamicinstabilitywhounderwentvarioushaemostaticprocedures
AT baekeumsoek comparisonbetweenexternalfixationandpelvicbinderinpatientswithpelvicfractureandhaemodynamicinstabilitywhounderwentvarioushaemostaticprocedures
AT kangbyunghee comparisonbetweenexternalfixationandpelvicbinderinpatientswithpelvicfractureandhaemodynamicinstabilitywhounderwentvarioushaemostaticprocedures
AT leegiljae comparisonbetweenexternalfixationandpelvicbinderinpatientswithpelvicfractureandhaemodynamicinstabilitywhounderwentvarioushaemostaticprocedures