Literature DB >> 26304045

Does Surgical Stabilization of Lateral Compression-type Pelvic Ring Fractures Decrease Patients' Pain, Reduce Narcotic Use, and Improve Mobilization?

Jennifer Hagen1, Renan Castillo2, Andrew Dubina3, Greg Gaski4, Theodore T Manson5, Robert V O'Toole5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Debate remains over the role of surgical treatment in minimally displaced lateral compression (Young-Burgess, LC, OTA 61-B1/B2) pelvic ring injuries. Lateral compression type 1 (LC1) injuries are defined by an impaction fracture at the sacrum; type 2 (LC2) are defined by a fracture that extends through the posterior iliac wing at the level of the sacroiliac joint. Some believe that operative stabilization of these fractures limits pain and eases mobilization, but to our knowledge there are few controlled studies on the topic. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does operative stabilization of LC1 and LC2 pelvic fractures decrease patients' narcotic use and lower their visual analog scale pain scores? (2) Does stabilization allow patients to mobilize earlier with physical therapy?
METHODS: This retrospective study of LC1 and LC2 fractures evaluated patients treated definitively at one institution from 2007 to 2013. All patients treated surgically, all nonoperative LC2, and all nonoperative LC1 fractures with complete sacral injury were included. In general, LC1 or LC2 fractures with greater than 10 mm of displacement and/or sagittal/axial plane deformity on static radiographs were treated surgically. One hundred fifty-eight patients in the LC1 group (107 [of 697 screened] nonoperative, 51 surgical) and 123 patients in the LC2 group (78 nonoperative, 45 surgical) met inclusion criteria. The surgical and nonoperative groups were matched for fracture type. To account for differences between patients treated surgically and nonoperatively, we used propensity modeling techniques incorporating treatment predictors. Propensity scores demonstrated good overlap and were used as part of multiple variable regression models to account for selection bias between the surgically treated and nonoperative groups. Patient-reported pain scores and narcotic administration were tallied in 24-hour increments during the first 24 hours of hospitalization, at 48 hours after intervention, and in the 24 hours before discharge. Time from intervention to mobilization out of bed was recorded; intervention was defined as the date of definitive surgical intervention or the day the surgeon determined the patient would be treated without surgery.
RESULTS: There was no difference in the narcotics distributed to any of the groups with the exception that the patients with surgically treated LC2 fractures used, on average (mean [95% confidence interval]) 40.2 (-72.9 to -7.6) mg morphine less at the 48-hour mark (p = 0.016). In general, there were no differences between the groups' pain scores. The surgically treated patients with LC1 fractures mobilized 1.7 (-3.3 to -0.01) days earlier (p = 0.034) than their nonoperative counterparts. There was no difference in the LC2 cohort in terms of time to mobilization between those treated with and without surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: There were few differences in pain scores and morphine use between the surgical and nonoperative groups, and the differences observed likely were not clinically important. We found no evidence that surgical stabilization of certain LC1 and LC2 pelvic fractures improves patients' pain, decreases their narcotic use, and improves time to mobilization. A randomized trial of patients with similar fractures and similar degrees initial displacement would help remove some of the confounders present in this study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26304045      PMCID: PMC4868153          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-015-4525-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  25 in total

1.  Persistent impairment after surgically treated lateral compression pelvic injury.

Authors:  Martin F Hoffmann; Clifford B Jones; Debra L Sietsema
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Propensity-score matching in the cardiovascular surgery literature from 2004 to 2006: a systematic review and suggestions for improvement.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 5.209

3.  OTA highlight paper predicting future displacement of nonoperatively managed lateral compression sacral fractures: can it be done?

Authors:  Brandon Bruce; Mark Reilly; Steven Sims
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.512

4.  Outcome of operatively treated type-C injuries of the pelvic ring.

Authors:  Jan Lindahl; Eero Hirvensalo
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.717

5.  Nonoperative immediate weightbearing of minimally displaced lateral compression sacral fractures does not result in displacement.

Authors:  Gillian L Sembler Soles; John Lien; Paul Tornetta
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 2.512

6.  Minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: understanding clinical versus statistical significance.

Authors:  Scott L Parker; Stephen K Mendenhall; David N Shau; Owoicho Adogwa; William N Anderson; Clinton J Devin; Matthew J McGirt
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2012-02-10

7.  Quality of life and sexual function after traumatic pelvic fracture.

Authors:  Katherine F Harvey-Kelly; Nikolaos K Kanakaris; Oghofori Obakponovwe; Robert M West; Peter V Giannoudis
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.512

8.  Lateral compression fracture of the pelvis represents a heterogeneous group of complex 3D patterns of displacement.

Authors:  A Khoury; H Kreder; T Skrinskas; M Hardisty; M Tile; C M Whyne
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2008-02-14       Impact factor: 2.586

9.  What constitutes a Young and Burgess lateral compression-I (OTA 61-B2) pelvic ring disruption? A description of computed tomography-based fracture anatomy and associated injuries.

Authors:  Kelly A Lefaivre; Jeffrey R Padalecki; Adam J Starr
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.512

10.  Lateral compression fractures of the pelvis: the importance of plain radiographs in the diagnosis and surgical management.

Authors:  J W Young; A R Burgess; R J Brumback; A Poka
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 2.199

View more
  15 in total

Review 1.  Lateral compression type 1 (LC1) pelvic ring injuries: a spectrum of fracture types and treatment algorithms.

Authors:  Kenan Kuršumović; Michael Hadeed; James Bassett; Joshua A Parry; Peter Bates; Mehool R Acharya
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-04-16

2.  Pararectus approach to the AO B2.2 pelvic fracture: early functional and radiological outcomes.

Authors:  Yi-Hsun Yu; Chang-Heng Liu; Yung-Heng Hsu; Ying-Chao Chou; I-Jung Chen
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-02-04

3.  Low-energy lateral compression type 1 (LC1) pelvic ring fractures in the middle-aged and elderly affect hospital quality measures and functional outcomes.

Authors:  Nina D Fisher; Sara J Solasz; Assefa Tensae; Sanjit R Konda; Kenneth A Egol
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-09-20

4.  Moving forward with the management of minimally displaced lateral compression pelvic ring injuries.

Authors:  Joshua A Parry; Nicholas J Tucker
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-06-18

5.  The lateral stress radiograph: an effective alternative to examination under anesthesia for identifying occult instability in minimally displaced lateral compression pelvic ring injuries.

Authors:  Nicholas J Tucker; Austin Heare; Stephen C Stacey; Cyril Mauffrey; Joshua A Parry
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-09-03

6.  Lateral compression type B 2-1 pelvic ring fractures in young patients do not require surgery.

Authors:  A Höch; I Schneider; J Todd; C Josten; J Böhme
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2016-05-02       Impact factor: 3.693

7.  Mobilization versus displacement on lateral stress radiographs for determining operative fixation of minimally displaced lateral compression type I (LC1) pelvic ring injuries.

Authors:  Joshua A Parry; Motasem Salameh; August Funk; Austin Heare; Stephen C Stacey; Cyril Mauffrey
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-01-16       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  A prospective case series for a minimally invasive internal fixation device for anterior pelvic ring fractures.

Authors:  Wayne Hoskins; Andrew Bucknill; James Wong; Edward Britton; Rodney Judson; Kellie Gumm; Roselyn Santos; Rohan Sheehy; Xavier Griffin
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 2.359

9.  Feasibility of anterior pelvic ring fixation alone for treating lateral compression type 1 pelvic fractures with nondisplaced complete sacral fractures: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Kun Shang; Chao Ke; Ya-Hui Fu; Shuang Han; Peng-Fei Wang; Bin-Fei Zhang; Yan Zhuang; Kun Zhang
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-03-16       Impact factor: 2.984

10.  TULIP: a randomised controlled trial of surgical versus non-surgical treatment of lateral compression injuries of the pelvis with complete sacral fractures (LC1) in the non-fragility fracture patient-a feasibility study protocol.

Authors:  Steven Barnfield; Jenny Ingram; Ruth Halliday; Xavier Griffin; Rosemary Greenwood; Rebecca Kandiyali; Julian Thompson; Joel Glynn; Lucy Beasant; John McArthur; Peter Bates; Mehool Acharya
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.