Abstract

Patients with traumatic pelvic ring injury may present with hypotension secondary to hemorrhage. Preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) and angioembolization (AE) are alternative interventions for management of hypotension associated with pelvic ring injury refractory to resuscitation and circumferential compression. We hypothesized that PPP may be independently associated with increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared with AE in patients with hypotension and pelvic ring injury. Adult patients with pelvic ring injury and hypotension managed with PPP or AE were retrospectively identified in the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) database from 2015 to 2019. Patients were matched on a propensity score for receiving PPP based on patient, injury, and treatment factors. The primary outcome was the risk of VTE after matching on the propensity score for treatment. The secondary outcomes included inpatient clinically important deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, respiratory failure, mortality, unplanned reoperation, sepsis, surgical site infection, hospital length of stay, and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay. In this study, 502 patients treated with PPP and 2,439 patients treated with AE met inclusion criteria. After propensity score matching on age, smoking status, Injury Severity Score, Tile B or C pelvic ring injury, bilateral femoral fracture, serious head injury, units of plasma and platelets given within 4 hours of admission, laparotomy, and level-I trauma center facility designation, 183 patients treated with PPP and 183 patients treated with AE remained. PPP, compared with AE, was associated with a 9.8% greater absolute risk of VTE, 6.5% greater risk of clinically important deep vein thrombosis, and 4.9% greater risk of respiratory failure after propensity score matching. PPP for the management of hypotension associated with pelvic ring injury is associated with higher rates of inpatient VTE events and sequelae compared with AE. Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.