Optimum timing of conversion from DCO to definitive fixation in closed fractures of the lower limb: When and how?

Effect of mechanical stability of osteosynthesis on infection rates: Timing of temporary and definitive fixation

Fracture related infection (FRI) remains one of the most challenging complications of orthopaedic trauma surgery. Several factors contribute to FRI development but, among those, particularly interesting from the orthopaedic surgeon's perspective is the contribution of mechanical stability and timing of fracture fixation. These are indeed crucial factors both in prevention and treatment of FRI and are directly influenced by the surgeon's work. While the role of stability has been studied and discussed, the pathophysiological process regulating such role and how this influences surgeon's treatment decision making is still debated. The same applies to the ideal timing of temporary or definitive fixation which varies according to the clinical scenario considered. In the present narrative review, we described the influence of mechanical stability on both FRI pathophysiology and on the decision making of FRI treatment. In addition, we analysed the impact of the timing of fracture fixation on the risk of FRI development particularly in those clinical scenarios where it has been shown to be specifically relevant, such as fractures affecting segments with poor soft tissue envelope, open fractures, damage control orthopaedics, and the need for soft tissue coverage.

Early total care or damage control orthopaedics for major fractures ? Results of propensity score matching for early definitive versus early temporary fixation based on data from the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society (TraumaRegister DGU®)

PURPOSE

Damage control orthopaedics (DCO) und early total care (ETC) are well-established strategies for managing severely injured patients. There is no definitive evidence of the superiority of DCO over ETC in polytrauma patients. We conducted this study to assess the probability of a polytraumatised patient undergoing DCO. In addition, the effect of DCO on complications and mortality was investigated.

METHODS

We analysed data from 12,569 patients with severe trauma (Injury Severity Score ≥ 16) who were enrolled in the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society (TraumaRegister DGU®) from 2009 to 2016 and had undergone surgery for extremity or pelvic fractures. These patients were allocated to a DCO or an ETC group. We used the propensity score to identify factors supporting the use of DCO. For a comparison of mortality rates, the groups were stratified and matched on the propensity score.

RESULTS

We identified relevant differences between DCO and ETC. DCO was considerably more often associated with packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusions (33.9% vs. 13.4%), catecholamine therapy (14.1% vs. 6.8%), lower extremity injuries (72.4% vs. 53.5%), unstable pelvic fractures (41.0% vs. 25.9%), penetrating injuries (2.8% vs. 1.5%), and shock (20.5% vs. 10.8%) and unconsciousness (23.7% vs. 16.3%) on admission. Based on the propensity score, patients with penetrating trauma, pRBC transfusions, unstable pelvic fractures, and lower extremity injuries were more likely to undergo DCO. A benefit of DCO such as reduced complications or reduced mortality was not detected.

CONCLUSION

We could identify some parameters of polytrauma patients used in the trauma registry (Traumaregister DGU®), which led more likely to a DCO therapy. The propensity score did not demonstrate the superiority of DCO over ETC in terms of outcome or complications. It did not appear to adequately adjust for the variables used here. Definitive evidence for or against the use of DCO remains unavailable.