Cervical spine injuries in facial fracture patients - injury mechanism and fracture type matter

Risk Factors for Acute-Level Hospital Course in Pediatric Craniofacial Fractures

PURPOSE

The pediatric craniofacial trauma literature is limited to single institutions or short study periods. Herein, this study analyzes a national database over 10 years to delineate the epidemiology of pediatric craniofacial fractures and to identify risk factors for acute-level hospital course in the largest series to date.

METHODS

Utilizing the National Trauma Data Bank, pediatric craniofacial fractures admitted between 2010 and 2019 were identified. Descriptive analyses and multivariable regression were performed to identify risk factors for acute-level hospital course.

RESULTS

A total of 155,136 pediatric craniofacial fracture cases were reviewed, including cranial vault (49.0%), nasal (22.4%), midface (21.0%), mandibular (20.2%), and orbital floor fractures (13.7%). Midface and orbital floor fractures occurred commonly as multicraniofacial fractures. Cranial vault fractures were the most common among all age groups, but frequency declined with age. In contrast, facial fractures increased with age. Despite the inherent complexity of multicraniofacial trauma, isolated fractures remained a concern for acute-level hospital course.Cranial vault and midface fractures had an increased risk of intracranial injury and intensive care unit admission (P<0.001). Mandibular and midface fractures had an increased risk for cervical spine fracture and tracheostomy (P<0.001). Patient and injury-specific risk factors among the fractures with the strongest association for each outcome-cranial vault and mandible-were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The inherent limitations of prior studies-geographical biases, small cohorts, and short-term study periods-were addressed. Describing the independent contribution of each craniofacial fracture to the risk of acute-level hospital course outcomes can be employed to better optimize risk stratification, counseling, and management.

Does the type of craniomaxillofacial fracture (CMF) differ between patients with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) and those with blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI)? A retrospective study

The purpose of the present study was to investigate and compare craniomaxillofacial fracture (CMF) type in patients with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) versus blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI). A retrospective cohort study was performed. The predictor variables were the types of CMF. The primary outcomes variables were ICH and BCVI. Secondary outcomes were death and survival with or without neurological sequelae. Descriptive, bivariate, and multiple logistic regression statistics were computed, and the significance level was set at P ≤ 0.05. The sample was composed of 1440 patients with a mean age of 46.6 years ±24 years, and 71% were men. Pure orbital wall (odds ratio [OR]), 3.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-12.69; P < 0.022), Le Fort III (OR, 16.08; 95% CI, 5.89-43.50; P < 0.001), cranial vault (OR, 9.74; 95% CI, 3.83.24.32; P < 0.001), skull base (OR, 9.42; 95% CI, 3.86-24.02; P < 0.001) and cervical fractures (OR, 5.50; 95% CI, 1.65-15.97; P = 0.003) were significantly associated with BCVI. All of the CMFs (P < 0.001), except for Le Fort I (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.18-2.63; P = 0.731), nasal (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.77-1.42; P = 0.758), and mandibular (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.01; P = 0.066) fractures, were significantly associated with ICH. Secondary outcomes were negatively influenced by ICH and BCVI (P < 0.001). Within the limitations of the study it seems that Le Fort I and nasal fractures could be protective of cerebrovascular injuries, by cushioning impact forces. On the other hand it seems that patients with pure orbital wall, Le Fort III and cranio-cervical fractures are more prone to having concomitant life-threatening cerebrovascular injuries. This category of patients should have an immediate and comprehensive neurological assessment and CT angiography to rule out BCVI and to determine its severity.

Spinal injury in major trauma: Epidemiology of 1104 cases from an Italian first level trauma center

INTRODUCTION

Traumatic spinal injuries are frequent and their management is debated, especially in major trauma patients. This study aims to describe a large population of major trauma patients with vertebral fractures to improve prevention measures and fracture management.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 6274 trauma patients prospectively collected between October 2010 and October 2020. Collected data include demographics, mechanism of trauma, type of imaging, fracture morphology, associated injuries, injury severity score (ISS), survival, and death timing. The statistical analysis focused on mechanism of trauma and the search of predictive factors for critical fractures.

RESULTS

Patients showed a mean age of 47 years and 72.5% were males. Trauma included 59.9% of road accidents and 35.1% of falls. 30.7% patients had at least a severe fracture, while 17.2% had fractures in multiple spinal regions. 13.7% fractures were complicated by spinal cord injury (SCI). The mean ISS of the total population was 26.4 (SD 16.3), with 70.7% patients having an ISS≥16. There is a higher rate of severe fractures in fall cases (40.1%) compared to RA (21.9% to 26.3%). The probability of a severe fracture increased by 164% in the case of fall and by 77% in presence of AIS≥3 associated injury of head/neck while reduced by 34% in presence of extremities associated injuries. Multiple level injuries increased with ISS rise and in the case of extremities associated injuries. The probability of a severe upper cervical fracture increased by 5.95 times in the presence of facial associated injuries. The mean length of stay was 24.7 days and 9.6% of patients died.

CONCLUSIONS

In Italy, road accidents are still the most frequent trauma mechanism and cause more cervico-thoracic fractures, while falls cause more lumbar fractures. Spinal cord injuries represent an indicator of more severe trauma. In motorcyclists or fallers/jumpers, there is a higher risk of severe fractures. When a spinal injury is diagnosed, the probability of a second vertebral fracture is consistent. These data could help the decisional workflow in the management of major trauma patients with vertebral injury.

The Immo Traffic Light System as a Decision-Making Tool for Prehospital Spinal Immobilization

BACKGROUND

Spinal injuries are difficult injuries to assess yet can be associated with significant neurological damage. To avoid secondary damage, immobilization is considered state of the art trauma care. The indication for spinal immobilization must be assessed, however, for potential complications as well as its advantages and disadvantages.

METHODS

This systematic review addressing the question of the correct indication for spinal immobilization in trauma patients was compiled on the basis of our previously published analysis of possible predictors from the Trauma Registry of the German Society for Trauma Surgery. A Delphi procedure was then used to develop suggestions for action regarding immobilization based on the results of this review.

RESULTS

The search of the literature yielded 576 publications. The 24 publications included in the qualitative analysis report of 2 228 076 patients. A decision tool for spinal immobilization in prehospital trauma care was developed (Immo traffic light system) based on the results of the Delphi procedure. According to this system, severely injured patients with blunt trauma, severe traumatic brain injury, peripheral neurological symptoms, or spinal pain requiring treatment should be immobilized. Patients with a statistically increased risk of spinal injury as a result of the four cardinal features (fall >3m, severe trunk injury, supra clavicular injury, seniority [age >65 years]) should only have their spinal motion restricted after weighing up the pros and cons. Isolated penetrating trunk injuries should not be immobilized.

CONCLUSION

High-quality studies demonstrating the benefit of prehospital spinal immobilization are still lacking. Decision tools such as the Immo traffic light system can help weigh up the pros and cons of immobilization.

"A" stands for airway - Which factors guide the need for on-scene airway management in facial fracture patients?

Background

Numerous guidelines highlight the need for early airway management in facial trauma patients since specific fracture patterns may induce airway obstruction. However, the incidence of these hallmark injuries, including flail mandibles and posterior displacement of the maxilla, is contentious. We aim to evaluate specific trauma-related variables in facial fracture patients, which affect the need for on-scene versus in-hospital airway management.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included all patients with any type of facial fracture, who required early airway management on-scene or in-hospital. The primary outcome variable was the site of airway management (on-scene versus hospital) and the main predictor variable was the presence of a traumatic brain injury (TBI). The association of fracture type, mechanism, and method for early airway management are also reported. Altogether 171 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria.

Results

Of the 171 patients included in the analysis, 100 (58.5) had combined midfacial fractures or combination fractures of facial thirds. Altogether 118 patients (69.0%) required airway management on-scene and for the remaining 53 patients (31.0%) airway was secured in-hospital. A total of 168 (98.2%) underwent endotracheal intubation, whereas three patients (1.8%) received surgical airway management. TBIs occurred in 138 patients (80.7%), but presence of TBI did not affect the site of airway management. Younger age, Glasgow Coma Scale-score of eight or less, and oro-naso-pharyngeal haemorrhage predicted airway management on-scene, whereas patients who had fallen at ground level and in patients with facial fractures but no associated injuries, the airway was significantly more often managed in-hospital.

Conclusions

Proper preparedness for airway management in facial fracture patients is crucial both on-scene and in-hospital. Facial fracture patients need proper evaluation of airway management even when TBI is not present.

The burden of facial trauma on mortality in patients with multiple injuries: A single-center analysis of 1862 motorcycle accidents

The study aims to assess the influence on mortality of motorcycle road accidents, caused by injuries to the head, chest, abdomen, face, skin, pelvis and extremities. Road motorcycle accidents consecutively admitted to Level I Trauma Center were retrospectively analyzed. Each body site involvement was classified through Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS-98), and Comprehensive Facial Injury (CFI) score; Injury Severity Score (ISS) was also calculated. The data collected were subjected to a descriptive analysis and inferential statistic, with uni- and multivariate analysis; mortality was the main outcome examined. 1862 patients were studied. Limbs (53.9%) and Head (53.8%) are the most involved body site, facial trauma regards 19.4% of the sample. Only 4.4% of Facial injuries occurred as isolated, 71.6% were associated to Head involvement. The overall mortality was 4.6% and 80.0% of dead patients were affected by Head injury. Multivariate analysis shows that head (OR=3.06, p <0.0001), thoracic (OR=1.82, p <0.0001) and abdominal trauma (OR=1.41, p =0.019) are predicting the risk of death. Facial trauma does not directly influence mortality and, however severe and distracting it may be, becomes secondary to the management of frequently associated brain injuries. Severity scores targeted to the risk of death, such as AIS and AIS-derived, are ineffective in describing the true characteristics of facial injuries. The CFI score has been shown to predict the weight of surgical treatment and the outcome of the hospital stay, therefore its use is recommended.