Literature DB >> 29634600

Predictors of Unplanned Reoperation After Operative Treatment of Pelvic Ring Injuries.

George Ochenjele1, Kristoff R Reid2, Renan C Castillo3, Carrie D Schoonover1, Ryan N Montalvo1, Theodore T Manson1, Marcus F Sciadini1, Jason W Nascone1, Anthony R Carlini3, Robert V OʼToole1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the incidence of unplanned reoperations after pelvic ring injuries and to develop a risk prediction model.
DESIGN: Retrospective review.
SETTING: Level I Trauma Center. PATIENTS: The medical records of 913 patients (644 male and 269 female patients; mean age, 39 years; age range, 16-89 years) with unstable pelvic ring fractures operatively treated at our center from 2003 to 2015 were reviewed. INTERVENTION: Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the relative contribution of associated clinical parameters to unplanned reoperations. A risk prediction model was developed to assess the effects of multiple covariates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Unplanned reoperation for infection, fixation failure, heterotopic ossification, or bleeding complication.
RESULTS: Unplanned reoperations totaled 137 fractures, with an overall rate of 15% (8% infection, 6% fixation failure, <1% heterotopic ossification, and <1% bleeding complication). Reoperations for infection and fixation failure typically occurred within the first month after the index procedure. Four independent predictors of reoperation were open fractures, combined pelvic ring and acetabular injuries, abdominal visceral injuries, and increasing pelvic fracture grade. No independent association was shown between reoperation and patient, treatment, or other injury factors.
CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned reoperations were relatively common. Infection and fixation failure were the most common indications for unplanned reoperations. Factors associated with reoperation are related to severity of pelvic and abdominal visceral injuries. Our findings suggest that these complications might be inherent and in many cases unavoidable despite appropriate current treatment strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29634600     DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001170

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0890-5339            Impact factor:   2.512


  5 in total

1.  What are the risk factors for complications after combined injury of the pelvic ring and acetabulum?

Authors:  B Cunningham; J Pearson; G McGwin; W Gardner; D Kiner; P Nowotarski; C A Spitler
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-01-26

2.  Complications after surgical treatment of pelvic fractures: a five-year follow-up of 194 patients.

Authors:  Natalie Lundin; Anders Enocson
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-02-10

3.  Does Aspirin Provide Adequate Chemoprophylaxis for Venous Thromboembolic Events in Operative Pelvic and Acetabular Fractures?

Authors:  Kathryn B Metcalf; Jerry Y Du; George Ochenjele
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2022-06

4.  What Factors Are Associated with Reoperation After Operative Treatment of Terrible Triad Injuries?

Authors:  Peter J Ostergaard; Matthew A Tarabochia; Matthew J Hall; George Dyer; Brandon E Earp; Philip Blazar; Dafang Zhang
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 4.755

5.  Percutaneous operative treatment of fragility fractures of the pelvis may not increase the general rate of complications compared to non-operative treatment.

Authors:  Laura Gericke; Annemarie Fritz; Georg Osterhoff; Christoph Josten; Philipp Pieroh; Andreas Höch
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-04-03       Impact factor: 2.374

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.