Abstract

BackgroundIn 2017, a novel classification for pelvic injuries was established by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). We validated its effectiveness using nationwide real-world data. The roles of associated vascular injury and open fracture in this system were also evaluated.MethodsPatients with pelvic fractures in the National Trauma Data Bank 2015 dataset were retrospectively studied. First, the mortality rates were compared by WSES classification. Second, independent predictors of mortality were evaluated using a multivariate logistic regression model. Patients with and without associated vascular injuries and the same hemodynamic and pelvic ring stability statuses were compared. Patients with associated vascular injuries were compared to the proportion of nonsurvivors and survivors with unstable pelvic ring injuries. Third, the outcomes were compared between patients with open pelvic fracture and closed pelvic fracture in the mild, moderate and severe WSES classes.ResultsDuring the 12-month study period, 44,163 blunt pelvic fracture patients were included. The mortality rates were 1.8%, 3.8% and 10.6% for the mild, moderate and severe WSES classes, respectively (p < 0.001). MLR analysis showed that unstable pelvic ring injury did not significantly affect mortality (p = 0.549), whereas open pelvic fracture and associated vascular injury were independent predictors of mortality (odds of mortality: open pelvic fracture 1.630, p < 0.001; associated vascular injury 1.602, p < 0.001). Patients with associated vascular injuries showed that there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with unstable pelvic ring injuries between survivors and nonsurvivors (37.2% vs. 32.7%, p = 0.323). In all three classes, patients with open pelvic fractures had significantly higher mortality rates and infection rates than patients with closed fractures (mortality rates: minor 3.5% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.009, moderate 11.2% vs. 3.3%, p < 0.001, severe 23.8% vs. 9.8%, p < 0.001; infection rates: minor 3.3% vs. 0.7%, p < 0.001, moderate 6.7% vs. 2.1%, p < 0.001, severe 7.9% vs. 2.8%, p < 0.001).ConclusionsBased on this nationwide study, the WSES guideline provides an accurate and reproducible classification of pelvic fractures. It is recommended that open/closed fractures and associated vascular injuries be evaluated as supplements of the WSES classification.

Highlights

  • In 2017, a novel classification for pelvic injuries was established by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES)

  • Study setting The data recorded in the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB), including age, sex, systolic blood pressure (SBP) in the emergency department (ED), pulse in the ED, respiratory rate (RR) in the ED, oxygen saturation in the ED, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) in the ED and injury severity score (ISS), were collected and evaluated

  • 44,163 blunt pelvic fracture patients were included in the current study

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In 2017, a novel classification for pelvic injuries was established by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). The roles of associated vascular injury and open fracture in this system were evaluated. In 2017, a novel classification and guideline were established by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), which includes surgeons from around the world [8] This classification considered both physiological status and mechanical stability to enable more effective critical decision making. The effectiveness of the WSES classification for pelvic injuries was validated using nationwide real-world data. Pelvic ring stability was evaluated by the WSES classification, associated vascular injury was not. We tried to examine whether the outcomes of open and closed pelvic fracture patients with the same WSES injury severity are different

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call