Nicholas D Clement1, Charles M Court-Brown. 1. Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Little France, Edinburgh, EH16 4SA, UK, nickclement@doctors.org.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To (1) to determine the incidence of elderly pelvic fractures over the last decade, (2) describe the epidemiology and outcome of patients with pubic rami fractures and compare these to those patients sustaining all other pelvic fractures, and (3) identify independent predictors of length of stay, return to domicile, and 1-year mortality for patients with pubic rami fractures. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 937 elderly patients (≥65 years) with pelvic fractures presenting to the study centre over a 15-year period. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, and associated fractures were recorded for a defined 2-year period. Outcomes assessed were length of stay, return to original place of domicile, and 1-year mortality. RESULTS: The incidence increased from 7.9 per 100,000 to 13.1 per 100,000. The majority were fragility fractures of the pubic rami (84%). Patients sustaining a pubic rami fracture were older, more likely to be female, less deprived and have sustained an isolated injury by a low-energy mechanism. Patients sustaining a pubic rami fracture were less likely to return to their original place of domicile. Pre-injury independence and mobility, socioeconomic status, associated fractures, energy of injury, and male gender were independent predictors of length of stay, return to original place of domicile, and 1-year mortality. CONCLUSION: The incidence of elderly pelvic fractures is increasing, and fractures of the pubic ramus have different patient demographics compared to other pelvic fractures. Patient demographics could be used to predict: length of stay, return to domicile, and 1-year mortality after a pubic rami fracture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective prognostic study, Level IV.
OBJECTIVES: To (1) to determine the incidence of elderly pelvic fractures over the last decade, (2) describe the epidemiology and outcome of patients with pubic rami fractures and compare these to those patients sustaining all other pelvic fractures, and (3) identify independent predictors of length of stay, return to domicile, and 1-year mortality for patients with pubic rami fractures. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 937 elderly patients (≥65 years) with pelvic fractures presenting to the study centre over a 15-year period. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, and associated fractures were recorded for a defined 2-year period. Outcomes assessed were length of stay, return to original place of domicile, and 1-year mortality. RESULTS: The incidence increased from 7.9 per 100,000 to 13.1 per 100,000. The majority were fragility fractures of the pubic rami (84%). Patients sustaining a pubic rami fracture were older, more likely to be female, less deprived and have sustained an isolated injury by a low-energy mechanism. Patients sustaining a pubic rami fracture were less likely to return to their original place of domicile. Pre-injury independence and mobility, socioeconomic status, associated fractures, energy of injury, and male gender were independent predictors of length of stay, return to original place of domicile, and 1-year mortality. CONCLUSION: The incidence of elderly pelvic fractures is increasing, and fractures of the pubic ramus have different patient demographics compared to other pelvic fractures. Patient demographics could be used to predict: length of stay, return to domicile, and 1-year mortality after a pubic rami fracture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective prognostic study, Level IV.
Authors: J L Marsh; Theddy F Slongo; Julie Agel; J Scott Broderick; William Creevey; Thomas A DeCoster; Laura Prokuski; Michael S Sirkin; Bruce Ziran; Brad Henley; Laurent Audigé Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2007 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Andreas Höch; Philipp Pieroh; Florian Gras; Tim Hohmann; Sven Märdian; Francis Holmenschlager; Holger Keil; Hans-Georg Palm; Steven C Herath; Christoph Josten; Hagen Schmal; Fabian M Stuby Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2019-04-04 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Siem A Dingemans; Suzanne C Kleipool; Marjolein A M Mulders; Jasper Winkelhagen; Niels W L Schep; J Carel Goslings; Tim Schepers Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 3.717