In Response

Pelvic ring injuries: recent advances in diagnosis and treatment

Pelvic ring injuries typically occur from high-energy trauma and are often associated with multisystem injuries. Prompt diagnosis of pelvic ring injuries is essential, and timely initial management is critical in the early resuscitation of polytraumatized patients. Definitive management of pelvic ring injuries continues to be a topic of much debate in the trauma community. Recent studies continue to inform our understanding of static and dynamic pelvic ring stability. Furthermore, literature investigating radiographic and clinical outcomes after nonoperative and operative management will help guide trauma surgeons select the most appropriate treatment of patients with these injuries.

Unstable minimally displaced lateral compression type 1 (LC1) pelvic ring injuries have a similar hospital course as intertrochanteric femur fractures

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate how the hospital course of minimally displaced LC1 fractures, with and without occult instability, compares with that of intertrochanteric femur fractures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective comparative cohort analysis at an urban level one trauma center of 40 consecutive patients with an isolated LC1 pelvic ring injury and 40 age/sex matched patients with an isolated intertrochanteric femur fracture was performed. Medical records and radiographs were reviewed for patient and injury characteristics, including demographics, displacement, time to surgery, ambulation, physical therapy (PT) clearance, hospital length of stay (LOS), and inpatient morphine milligram equivalents (MME).

RESULTS

The LC1 pelvic ring injury group included 26 (65%) patients with ≥ 10 mm of displacement on lateral stress radiographs. The unstable LC1 group, compared to the stable LC1 group, had a greater LOS (median difference (MD): 2 days, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1 to 4, p = 0.0004), longer time to ambulate 15 feet (MD: 1 day, CI: 1 to 2, p = 0.0002), longer time to clear PT (MD: 2 days, CI: 1 to 3, p = 0.0003), and more inpatient MMEs (MD: 386 MME, CI: 225.8 to 546.7, p = 0.0002). The unstable LC1 and intertrochanteric fracture groups had no detectable differences in LOS (p = 0.24), days to ambulate 15 feet (p = 0.46), days to clear PT (p = 0.95), and inpatient MMEs (p = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

Patients with minimally displaced unstable LC1 injuries had worse hospital courses than stable LC1 injuries and similar hospital courses as intertrochanteric femur fractures. These findings emphasize the associated morbidity of unstable LC1 injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Retrospective cohort study.

Lateral compression type 1 (LC1) pelvic ring injuries: a spectrum of fracture types and treatment algorithms

Lateral compression type 1 (LC1) fractures are the commonest pelvic ring injury. However, they represent a heterogenous spectrum of injury mechanisms and fracture patterns, resulting in a lack of strong evidence for a universally agreed treatment algorithm. Although consensus exists that LC1 fractures have a preserved posterior ligamentous complex and are vertically stable, controversy persists around defining internal rotational instability. As such, treatment strategies extend from routine non-operative management through to dynamic imaging such as examination under anaesthetic (EUA) or stress radiographs to guide fixation algorithm. Multiple protocols sit between these two, all with slightly different thresholds for advocating surgery or otherwise, exemplifying a broad lack of consensus that is not seen for other, more severe, grades of pelvic ring injury. In the following review we discuss the evolving concepts of pelvic ring instability and management, starting from a historical perspective, through to current trends and controversies in LC1 fracture treatment. Emerging directions for research and emerging pharmacological and surgical treatments/technologies are also considered and expert commentary from 3 leading centres provided. The distinction is made between LC1 fracture arising from high-energy trauma and those following low-energy falls from standing height (so-called fragility fractures of the pelvis-FFP), since these two patient groups have different functional requirements and medical vulnerabilities. Issues pertaining to FFP are considered separately.

Assessment of instability in type B pelvic ring fractures

Pelvic ring fractures have increased in incidence and operative fixation over the past several decades. These are dynamic injuries but decisions on operative management are still often made on the basis of static imaging. Expert opinion varies greatly on which injuries require fixation and how much fixation. Examination under anaesthesia has been shown to guide management of pelvic injuries by more accurately assessing levels of instability.