gms | German Medical Science

German Congress of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (DKOU 2022)

25. - 28.10.2022, Berlin

Article

Send article

Patients with combined pelvic and spinal injuries have worse clinical and operative outcomes than patients with isolated pelvic injuries – analysis of the German Pelvic Registry

Meeting Abstract

Search Medline for

  • presenting/speaker Luis Alfredo Navas Contreras - Diakonie Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
  • Natalie Mengis - ARCUS Kliniken Pforzheim, Pforzheim, Germany
  • Alexander Zimmerer - ARCUS Kliniken, Universitätsklinikum Greifswald, Pforzheim, Germany
  • Sebastian Schmidt - ARCUS Kliniken Pforzheim, Pforzheim, Germany
  • Jules-Nikolaus Rippke - ARCUS Kliniken Pforzheim, Pforzheim, Germany
  • Markus Küper - BGU Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
  • Benjamin Ulmar - BGU Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany

Deutscher Kongress für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie (DKOU 2022). Berlin, 25.-28.10.2022. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2022. DocAB38-563

doi: 10.3205/22dkou249, urn:nbn:de:0183-22dkou2498

Published: October 25, 2022

© 2022 Navas Contreras et al.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. See license information at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Outline

Text

Objectives: Pelvic fractures are often associated with spine injury in polytrauma patients. This study aimed to determine whether concomitant spine injury influence the surgical outcome of pelvic fracture.

Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of data of patients registered in the German Pelvic Registry between January 2003 and December 2017. Clinical characteristics, surgical parameters, and outcomes were compared between patients with isolated pelvic fracture (group A) and patients with pelvic fracture plus spine injury (group B). We also compared apart patients with isolated acetabular fracture (group C) versus patients with acetabular fracture plus spine injury (group D).

Results: Surgery for pelvic fracture was significantly more common in group B than in group A (38.3% vs. 36.6%; p = 0.0002), as also emergency pelvic stabilizations (9.5% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.0001). The mean time to emergency stabilization was longer in group B (137 ± 106 min vs. 113 ± 97 min; p < 0.0001), as well as the mean time until definitive stabilization of the pelvic fracture (7.3 ± 4 days vs. 5.4 ± 8.0 days; p = 0.147). The mean duration of treatment and the morbidity and mortality rates were all significantly higher in group B (p < 0.0001). Operation time was significantly shorter in group C than in group D (176 ± 81 min vs. 203 ± 119 min, p < 0.0001). Intraoperative blood loss was not significantly different between the two groups with acetabular injuries. Although preoperative acetabular fracture dislocation was slightly less common in group D, postoperative fracture dislocation was slightly more common. The distribution of Matta grades was significantly different between the two groups. Patients with isolated acetabular injuries were significantly less likely to have neurological deficit at discharge (94.5%; p < 0.0001). In-hospital complications were more common in patients with combined spine plus pelvic injuries (groups B and D) than in patients with isolated pelvic and acetabular injury (groups A and C).

Conclusions: Delaying definitive surgical treatment of pelvic fractures due to spinal cord injury appears to have a negative impact on the outcome of pelvic fractures, especially on the quality of reduction of acetabular fractures.