G Jansen1,2, T Hefke3, G Wittenberg3, T Vordemvenne4, F Mertzlufft5. 1. Klinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensiv‑, Notfall‑, Transfusionsmedizin und Schmerztherapie, Evangelisches Klinikum Bethel, Burgsteig 13, 33617, Bielefeld, Deutschland. gerritjansen@web.de. 2. Fachbereich Medizin und Rettungswesen, Studieninstitut für kommunale Verwaltung Westfalen-Lippe, Bielefeld, Deutschland. gerritjansen@web.de. 3. Institut für diagnostische und interventionelle Radiologie und Kinderradiologie, Evangelisches Klinikum Bethel, Bielefeld, Deutschland. 4. Klinik für Unfallchirurgie und Orthopädie, Evangelisches Klinikum Bethel, Bielefeld, Deutschland. 5. Evangelisches Klinikum Bethel, Burgsteig 13, 33617, Bielefeld, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Severe hemorrhage is a dreaded complication of pelvic fractures. It has a significant impact on early trauma-associated mortality. Hemorrhage that is secondary to pelvic fractures can be reduced by external stabilization devices. Despite the commercial availability of many different systems, they are infrequently used. The aim of this computed tomography (CT) study was to examine the use of external pelvic stabilization devices. METHODS: Between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2015 a total of 982 images produced in CT trauma scans at a level 1 trauma centre were retrospectively examined with respect to the presence of external pelvic stabilizers. The type of device applied, its actual position including deviation from optimal position as well as pelvic parameters and complications were determined. RESULTS: In 67 out of 982 patients (6.82%) with suspected multiple trauma, an external pelvic stabilizer was employed. In 41.8% the devices were not placed in concordance with prevailing scientific knowledge, 53.73% of devices did not comply with the manufacturer's instructions and 51.85% of systems with pneumatic cuffs caused significant malrotation. In one patient the cuff induced hypoperfusion of the leg but without further sequelae. CONCLUSION: While the prehospital use of pelvic slings is increasing, misplacement is very common. Especially inconsistencies between manufacturers' manuals and current scientific knowledge warrant further improvement. In systems with pneumatic cuffs malrotation of the device is common and clinically relevant. Hypoperfusion of the lower extremities is possible and should be taken into account when employing these devices.
BACKGROUND: Severe hemorrhage is a dreaded complication of pelvic fractures. It has a significant impact on early trauma-associated mortality. Hemorrhage that is secondary to pelvic fractures can be reduced by external stabilization devices. Despite the commercial availability of many different systems, they are infrequently used. The aim of this computed tomography (CT) study was to examine the use of external pelvic stabilization devices. METHODS: Between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2015 a total of 982 images produced in CT trauma scans at a level 1 trauma centre were retrospectively examined with respect to the presence of external pelvic stabilizers. The type of device applied, its actual position including deviation from optimal position as well as pelvic parameters and complications were determined. RESULTS: In 67 out of 982 patients (6.82%) with suspected multiple trauma, an external pelvic stabilizer was employed. In 41.8% the devices were not placed in concordance with prevailing scientific knowledge, 53.73% of devices did not comply with the manufacturer's instructions and 51.85% of systems with pneumatic cuffs caused significant malrotation. In one patient the cuff induced hypoperfusion of the leg but without further sequelae. CONCLUSION: While the prehospital use of pelvic slings is increasing, misplacement is very common. Especially inconsistencies between manufacturers' manuals and current scientific knowledge warrant further improvement. In systems with pneumatic cuffs malrotation of the device is common and clinically relevant. Hypoperfusion of the lower extremities is possible and should be taken into account when employing these devices.
Authors: Martin J Heetveld; Ian Harris; Glen Schlaphoff; Zsolt Balogh; Scott K D'Amours; Michael Sugrue Journal: World J Surg Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Florian Debus; Rolf Lefering; Michael Frink; Christian Alexander Kühne; Carsten Mand; Benjamin Bücking; Steffen Ruchholtz Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2015-12-04 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Gil Z Shlamovitz; William R Mower; Jonathan Bergman; Kenneth R Chuang; Jonathan Crisp; David Hardy; Martine Sargent; Sunil D Shroff; Eric Snyder; Marshall T Morgan Journal: J Trauma Date: 2009-03
Authors: Federico Coccolini; Philip F Stahel; Giulia Montori; Walter Biffl; Tal M Horer; Fausto Catena; Yoram Kluger; Ernest E Moore; Andrew B Peitzman; Rao Ivatury; Raul Coimbra; Gustavo Pereira Fraga; Bruno Pereira; Sandro Rizoli; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Ari Leppaniemi; Roberto Manfredi; Stefano Magnone; Osvaldo Chiara; Leonardo Solaini; Marco Ceresoli; Niccolò Allievi; Catherine Arvieux; George Velmahos; Zsolt Balogh; Noel Naidoo; Dieter Weber; Fikri Abu-Zidan; Massimo Sartelli; Luca Ansaloni Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2017-01-18 Impact factor: 5.469