Abstract
BackgroundOver the years, a trend has evolved towards operative treatment of flail chest although evidence is limited. Furthermore, little is known about operative treatment for patients with multiple rib fractures without a flail chest. The aim of this study was to compare rib fixation based on a clinical treatment algorithm with nonoperative treatment for both patients with a flail chest or multiple rib fractures.MethodsAll patients with ≥ 3 rib fractures admitted to one of the two contributing hospitals between January 2014 and January 2017 were retrospectively included in this multicenter cohort study. One hospital treated all patients nonoperatively and the other hospital treated patients with rib fixation according to a clinical treatment algorithm. Primary outcome measures were intensive care length of stay and hospital length of stay for patients with a flail chest and patients with multiple rib fractures, respectively. To control for potential confounding, propensity score matching was applied.ResultsA total of 332 patients were treated according to protocol and available for analysis. The mean age was 56 (SD 17) years old and 257 (77%) patients were male. The overall mean Injury Severity Score was 23 (SD 11) and the average number of rib fractures was 8 (SD 4). There were 92 patients with a flail chest, 37 (40%) had rib fixation and 55 (60%) had non-operative treatment. There were 240 patients with multiple rib fractures, 28 (12%) had rib fixation and 212 (88%) had non-operative treatment. For both patient groups, after propensity score matching, rib fixation was not associated with intensive care unit length of stay (for flail chest patients) nor with hospital length of stay (for multiple rib fracture patients), nor with the secondary outcome measures.ConclusionNo advantage could be demonstrated for operative fixation of rib fractures. Future studies are needed before rib fixation is embedded or abandoned in clinical practice.
Highlights
Over the years, a trend has evolved towards operative treatment of flail chest evidence is limited
The non-operative group was formed by all patients with rib fractures admitted to the Radboud University Medical Center where treatment consisted of adequate pain management, supportive mechanical ventilation when indicated, and physiotherapy for breathing exercises according to standard national guidelines
For patients with multiple rib fractures, there was no association between rib fixation and hospital length of stay (HLOS) (CI − 0.6 to 13.6, p = 0.074) and the secondary outcome measures (Table 4)
Summary
A trend has evolved towards operative treatment of flail chest evidence is limited. Primary outcome measures were intensive care length of stay and hospital length of stay for patients with a flail chest and patients with multiple rib fractures, respectively. There were 240 patients with multiple rib fractures, 28 (12%) had rib fixation and 212 (88%) had non-operative treatment For both patient groups, after propensity score matching, rib fixation was not associated with intensive care unit length of stay (for flail chest patients) nor with hospital length of stay (for multiple rib fracture patients), nor with the secondary outcome measures. In a recent systematic review, rib fixation in patients with a flail chest was associated with a reduced: intensive care unit length of stay, days on mechanical ventilation, mortality rate, pneumonia rate, and treatment costs, evidence remains limited [12]. Studies investigating the effect of rib fixation in patients with multiple rib fractures are even more scarce, two retrospective cohort studies showed promising results [13, 14]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
