Developments in the understanding of staging a “major fracture” in polytrauma: results from an initiative by the polytrauma section of ESTES

Abstract

PurposeAlthough the term “major fracture” is commonly used in the management of trauma patients, it is defined insufficiently to date. The polytrauma section of ESTES is trying to develop a more standardized use and a definition of the term. In this process, a standardized literature search was undertaken. We test the hypothesis that the understanding of “major fractures” has changed and is modified by a better understanding of patient physiology.MethodsA systematic literature search of the Medline and EMBASE databases was conducted in March 2022. Original studies that investigated surgical treatment strategies in polytraumatized patients with fractures were included: This included timing, sequence and type of operative treatment. A qualitative synthesis regarding the prevalence of anatomic regions of interest and core factors determining decision-making was performed. Data were stratified by decades.Results4278 articles were identified. Of these, 74 were included for qualitative evaluation: 50 articles focused on one anatomic region, 24 investigated the relevance of multiple anatomic regions. Femur fractures were investigated most frequently (62) followed by pelvic (22), spinal (15) and tibial (15) fractures. Only femur (40), pelvic (5) and spinal (5) fractures were investigated in articles with one anatomic region of interest. Before 2010, most articles focused on long bone injuries. After 2010, fractures of pelvis and spine were cited more frequently. Additional determining factors for decision-making were covered in 67 studies. These included chest injuries (42), TBI (26), hemorrhagic shock (25) and other injury-specific factors (23). Articles before 2000 almost exclusively focused on chest injury and TBI, while shock and injury-specific factors (e.g., soft tissues, spinal cord injury, and abdominal trauma) became more relevant after 2000.ConclusionOver time, the way “major fractures” influenced surgical treatment strategies has changed notably. While femur fractures have long been the only focus, fixation of pelvic and spinal fractures have become more important over the last decade. In addition to the fracture location, associated conditions and injuries (chest trauma and head injuries) influence surgical decision-making as well. Hemodynamic stability and injury-specific factors (soft tissue injuries) have increased in importance over time.