Preperitoneal pelvic packing: A 2018 EAST Master Class Video Presentation

Factors Associated With Pelvic Infection After Pre-Peritoneal Pelvic Packing for Hemodynamically Unstable Pelvic Fractures

Background: Preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) and external fixation has led to improved mortality after devastating pelvic trauma. However, there is limited literature on infection after this intervention. We aim to study the risk factors associated with pelvic infection after PPP. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of patients who underwent PPP at a single level 1 trauma center was performed. Results: Over the 18-year study period, 222 patients were identified. Twenty-three percent of patients had an open fracture. Pelvic angiography was performed in 24% of patients with 16% requiring angioembolization (AE). The average time to packing removal was two (one to two days) days, although 10% of patients had their pelvis re-packed. Overall infection rate was 14% (n = 31); if pelvic re-packing was performed, the infection rate increased to 45%. Twenty-two of the patients with an infection required additional procedures for their infection, and ultimately hardware removal occurred in eight patients. On univariable analysis, patients with pelvic infections had more open fractures (55% vs. 17%; p < 0.01), underwent AE more frequently (29% vs. 14%; p = 0.04), were more likely to undergo repacking (32% vs. 6%; p < 0.01), and had packing in place for longer (2 [1,2] vs. 2 [2,3]; p = 0.01). On logistic multivariable regression analysis, open fracture (odds ratio [OR], 5.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-14.1) and pelvic re-packing (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.2-18.5) were independent risk factors for pelvic infection. Conclusions: Pelvic infection after PPP is a serious complication independently associated with open fracture and re-packing of the pelvis. Re-intervention was required in most patients with infection.

Management of Pelvic Trauma

Pelvic fractures are common after blunt trauma with patients' presentation ranging from stable with insignificant fractures to life-threatening exsanguination from unstable fractures. Often, hemorrhagic shock from a pelvic fracture may go unrecognized and high clinical suspicion for a pelvic source lies with the clinician. A multidisciplinary coordinated effort is required for management of these complex patients. In the exsanguinating patient, hemorrhage control remains the top priority and may be achieved with external stabilization, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta, preperitoneal pelvic packing, angiographic intervention, or a combination of therapies. These modalities have been shown to reduce mortality in this challenging population.

Early Surgical Stabilization of Rib Fractures is Feasible in Patients With Non-Urgent Operative Pelvic Injuries

INTRODUCTION

The feasibility of prioritizing surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) in patients with other injuries is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the timing and outcomes of SSRF between patients with and without non-urgent operative pelvic injuries.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, all patients between 2010 and 2020 who underwent SSRF (SSRF group) and those who underwent SSRF and non-urgent operative management of pelvic fractures (SSRF + P group) were included. Demographics, injury characteristics, operative details, and outcomes were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Over 11 years, 154 SSRF patients were identified, with 143 patients in the SSRF group (93%) and 11 patients in the SSRF + P group (7%). Median number of rib fractures (7 vs 9, P = .04), total number of fractures (11 vs 15, P < .01), and flail segment (54% vs 91%, P = .02) were higher in SSRF + P group. Median time to SSRF was similar (0 vs 1 day, P = .20) between the 2 groups. Median time to pelvic fixation was 3 days in SSRF + P group and 8 out of 11 patients (73%) underwent SSRF prior to pelvic fixation. Median operative time (137 vs 178 mins, P = .14) and median number of ribs plated (4 vs 5, P = .05) were higher in SSRF + P group. There was no difference in SSRF-related complications, pelvic fracture-related complications from operative positioning, rates of pneumonia, or mortality between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SSRF can be performed early in patients with non-urgent operative pelvic injuries without a difference in pelvic fracture-related complications, SSRF-related complications, pneumonia, or mortality.

Inflate and pack! Pelvic packing combined with REBOA deployment prevents hemorrhage related deaths in unstable pelvic fractures

INTRODUCTION

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is advocated for hemorrhage control in pelvic fracture patients in shock. We evaluated REBOA in patients undergoing preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) for pelvic fracture-related hemorrhage.

METHODS

Retrospective, single-institution study of unstable pelvic fractures (hemodynamic instability despite 2 units of red blood cells (RBCs) and fracture identified on x-ray). Management included the placement of a Zone III REBOA in the emergency department (ED) for systolic blood pressure <80 mmHg. All PPP patients were included and analyzed for injury characteristics, transfusion requirements, outcomes and complications. Additionally, patients who received REBOA (REBOA+) were compared to those that did not (REBOA-).

RESULTS

During the study period (January 2015 - January 2019), 652 pelvic fracture patients were admitted; 78 consecutive patients underwent PPP. Median RBCs at PPP completion compared to 24 h post-packing were 11 versus 3 units (p<0.05). Median time to operation was 45 min. After PPP, 7 (9%) patients underwent angioembolization. Mortality was 14%. No mortalities were due to ongoing pelvic fracture hemorrhage or physiologic exhaustion; all were a withdrawal of life sustaining support, most commonly due to neurologic insults (TBI/fat emboli = 6, stroke/spinal cord injury = 3). REBOA+ patients (n = 31) had a significantly higher injury severity score (45 vs 38, p<0.01) and higher heart rate (130 vs 118 beats per minute, p = 0.04) than REBOA-. The systolic blood pressure, base deficit, and number of RBCs transfused in the ED, and time spent in the ED were similar between groups. REBOA+ had a higher median transfusion of RBCs at PPP completion (11 units vs 5 units, p<0.01) but similar RBC transfusion in the 24 h after PPP (2 vs 1 units, p = 0.27). Mortality, pelvic infection, and ICU length of stay was not different between these cohorts.

CONCLUSION

PPP with REBOA was utilized in more severely injured patients with greater physiologic derangements. Although REBOA patients required greater transfusion requirements, there were no deaths due to acute pelvic hemorrhage. This suggests the combination of REBOA with PPP provides life-saving hemorrhage control in otherwise devastating injuries.

Pelvic fracture-related hypotension: A review of contemporary adjuncts for hemorrhage control

ABSTRACT

Major pelvic hemorrhage remains a considerable challenge of modern trauma care associated with mortality in over a third of patients. Efforts to improve outcomes demand continued research into the optimal employment of both traditional and newer hemostatic adjuncts across the full spectrum of emergent care environments. The purpose of this review is to provide a concise description of the rationale for and effective use of currently available adjuncts for the control of pelvic hemorrhage. In addition, the challenges of defining the optimal order and algorithm for employment of these adjuncts will be outlined.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Review, level IV.