Isolated rib cage fractures in the elderly: Do all patients belong to the intensive care unit? A retrospective nationwide analysis

Comparative study of wound outcomes and surgical strategies: Internal fixation versus external stabilization in rib fracture patients with traumatic chest wounds

The clinical management of traumatic chest incisions accompanied by rib fractures presents the formidable challenge. The study was carried out to compare the outcomes of auscultatory triangle internal fixation (ATIF) and external fixation (EF) in such injuries. From June 2019 to June 2022, 105 patients with multiple rib fractures participated in the cohort study in which they were divided into two groups: 53 patients underwent ATIF and 52 patients underwent EF. The incidence of surgical site infection, wound healing time, incidence of wound dehiscence, number of dressing changes, pain as measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS), duration of hospitalization, period of return to work, pulmonary complications and functionality of the upper limbs as assessed by the Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire were among the parameters evaluated. In comparison with EF, ATIF demonstrated the decreased incidence of wound dehiscence (1.9% vs. 9.6%) (p < 0.05), surgical site infection (3.8 vs. 11.5) and wound healing time (12.3 ± 2.1 vs. 18.5 ± 3.7 days) (p < 0.05). Furthermore, during their ATIF treatment, patients required fewer changes of dressing (3.5 ± 0.8 vs. 5.7 ± 1.2) and demonstrated enhanced pain management, reduced hospital stays and expedited return to work (p < 0.05). ATIF group demonstrated enhancements in both upper limb functionality and post-operative pulmonary function (p < 0.05). The utilization of ATIF as opposed to EF for the treatment of traumatic chest wounds accompanied by rib fractures yields superior outcomes in terms of wound healing, infection reduction and restoration of pulmonary and upper limb functionality.

Frailty as a predictor of negative outcomes in trauma patients with rib fractures

BACKGROUND

In patients with rib fractures, adverse outcomes are associated with number of rib fractures; however, studies suggest an association with frailty. We assessed whether frailty, measured using the Canadian Study of Health and Aging clinical frailty scale, was associated with adverse outcomes in this population.

METHODS

Patients ≥50 years admitted for rib fractures from July 2015 to June 2020 were retrospectively scored for frailty. Demographics, comorbidities, injury information, hospital course, and complications were collected. Univariate analyses were performed to assess significant differences between the fit, prefrail, and frail groups. The association between number of rib fractures and frailty with outcomes was determined.

RESULTS

Controlling for age, sex, Injury Severity Score, preadmission anticoagulant, injury mechanism, and comorbidities and nonchest Abbreviated Injury Scores showing significant differences, the number of rib fractures was associated with developing pneumonia (odds ratio = 1.197 [1.076-1.332]; P = .001), hospital length of stay (odds ratio = 1.066 [1.033-1.100], P < .001), mortality (odds ratio = 1.157 [1.048-1.278], P = .004), and discharge to long-term acute care facilities (odds ratio = 1.295 [1.084-1.546], P = .004). Frailty was associated with hospital length of stay (odds ratio = 1.659 [1.059-2.598], P = .027) and discharge to skilled nursing facilities (odds ratio = 5.282 [1.567-17.802], P = .007).

CONCLUSION

In our population, the number of rib fractures was associated with respiratory complications and mortality. Frailty was associated with longer hospitalization and discharge to higher level of care.

Respiratory events after intensive care unit discharge in trauma patients: Epidemiology, outcomes, and risk factors

BACKGROUND

Respiratory complications are associated with significant morbidity and mortality in trauma patients. The care transition from the intensive care unit (ICU) to the acute care ward is a vulnerable time for injured patients. There is a lack of knowledge about the epidemiology of respiratory events and their outcomes during this transition.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study in a single Level I trauma center of injured patients 18 years and older initially admitted to the ICU from 2015 to 2019 who survived initial transfer to the acute care ward. The primary outcome was occurrence of a respiratory event, defined as escalation in oxygen therapy beyond nasal cannula or facemask for three or more consecutive hours. Secondary outcomes included unplanned intubation for a primary pulmonary cause, adjudicated via manual chart review, as well as in-hospital mortality and length of stay. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine patient characteristics associated with posttransfer respiratory events.

RESULTS

There were 6,561 patients that met the inclusion criteria with a mean age of 52.3 years and median Injury Severity Score of 18 (interquartile range, 13-26). Two hundred and sixty-two patients (4.0%) experienced a respiratory event. Respiratory events occurred early after transfer (median, 2 days, interquartile range, 1-5 days), and were associated with high mortality (16% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.001), and ICU readmission rates (52.6% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.001). Increasing age, male sex, severe chest injury, and comorbidities, including preexisting alcohol use disorder, congestive heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, were associated with increased odds of a respiratory event. Fifty-eight patients experienced an unplanned intubation for a primary pulmonary cause, which was associated with an in-hospital mortality of 39.7%.

CONCLUSION

Respiratory events after transfer to the acute care ward occur close to the time of transfer and are associated with high mortality. Interventions targeted at this critical time are warranted to improve patient outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological study, level III.

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures in octogenarians and beyond-what are the outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Prospective studies of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) have excluded elderly patients, and no study has exclusively addressed the ≥80-year-old subgroup. We hypothesized that SSRF is associated with decreased mortality in trauma patients 80 years or older.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective cohort study involving eight centers. Patients who underwent SSRF from 2015 to 2020 were matched to controls by study center, age, injury severity score, and presence of intracranial hemorrhage. Patients with chest Abbreviated Injury Scale score less than 3, head Abbreviated Injury Scale score greater than 2, death within 24 hours, and desire for no escalation of care were excluded. A subgroup analysis compared early (0-2 days postinjury) to late (3-7 days postinjury) SSRF. Poisson regression accounting for clustered data by center calculated the relative risk (RR) of the primary outcome of mortality for SSRF versus nonoperative management.

RESULTS

Of 360 patients, 133 (36.9%) underwent SSRF. Compared with nonoperative patients, SSRF patients were more severely injured and more likely to receive locoregional analgesia. There were 31 hospital deaths among the entire sample (8.6%). Multivariable regression demonstrated a decreased risk of mortality for the SSRF group, as compared with the nonoperative group (RR, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.69; p < 0.01). However, SSRF patients were more likely to develop pneumonia, and had an increased duration of both mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit stay. There were no differences in discharge destination, although the SSRF group was less likely to be discharged on narcotics (RR, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.90; p = 0.01). There was no difference in adjusted mortality between the early and late SSRF subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Patients selected for SSRF were substantially more injured versus those managed nonoperatively. Despite this, SSRF was independently associated with decreased mortality. With careful patient selection, SSRF may be considered a viable treatment option in octogenarian/nonagenarians.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, Level IV.