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

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures in the geriatric trauma population is associated with equivalent outcomes to a younger cohort: A propensity matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) improves outcomes in chest wall trauma. Geriatric patients are particularly vulnerable to poor outcomes; yet, this population is often excluded from SSRF studies. Further delineating patient outcomes by age is necessary to optimize care for the aging trauma population.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted examining outcomes among patients aged 40+ for whom an SSRF consult was placed between 2017 and 2022 at a level 1 trauma center. Patients were categorized into geriatric (65+) and adult (40-64), as well as 80 years and older (80+) and 79 and younger (40-79). Patient outcomes were assessed comparing non-operative and operative management of chest wall trauma. Propensity matched analysis was performed to evaluate mortality differences between adult and geriatric patients who did and did not undergo SSRF.

RESULTS

A total of 543 patients had an SSRF consult. Of these, 227 were 65+, and 73 were 80+. A total of 129 patients underwent SSRF (24 %). The percentage of patients undergoing SSRF did not vary between 40 and 64 and 65+ (23.7 % and 23.6 %, respectively, p = 0.97) or 40-79 and 80+ (24.0 vs 21.9, p = 0.69). Patients undergoing SSRF had higher chest injury burden and were more likely to require mechanical ventilation and ICU level care on admission. Overall, in-hospital mortality rate was 4.6 %. Among patients who underwent SSRF, mortality rate did not significantly differ between 65+ and 40-64 (7.8% vs 2.7 %, p = 0.18) or 80+ and 40-79 (6.3% vs 4.6 %, p = 0.77). This remained true in propensity matched analysis.

CONCLUSION

Geriatric and octogenarian patients with rib fractures underwent SSRF at similar rates and achieved equivalent outcomes to their younger counterparts. SSRF did not differentially affect mortality outcomes based on age group in propensity matched analysis. SSRF is safe for geriatric patients including octogenarians.

Incidence of surgical rib fixation at chest wall injury society collaborative centers and a guide for expected number of cases (CWIS-CC1)

PURPOSE

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) improves outcomes in certain patient populations. The Chest Wall Injury Society (CWIS) began a new initiative to recognize centers who epitomize their mission as CWIS Collaborative Centers (CWIS-CC). We sought to describe incidence and epidemiology of SSRF at our institutions.

METHODS

A retrospective registry evaluation of all patients (age > 15 years) treated at international trauma centers from 1/1/20 to 7/30/2021 was performed. Variables included: age, gender, mechanism of injury, injury severity score, abbreviated injury severity score (AIS), emergency department disposition, length of stay, presence of rib/sternal fractures, and surgical stabilization of rib/sternal fractures. Classification and regression tree analysis (CART) was used for analysis.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 9 centers, 26,084 patient encounters. Rib fractures were present in 24% (n = 6294). Overall, 2% of all patients underwent SSRF and 8% of patients with rib fractures underwent SSRF. CART analysis of SSRF by AIS-Chest demonstrated a difference in management by age group. AIS-Chest 3 had an SSRF rate of 3.7, 7.3, and 12.9% based on the age ranges (16-19; 80-110), (20-49; 70-79), and (50-69), respectively (p = 0.003). AIS-Chest > 3 demonstrated an SSRF rate of 9.6, 23.3, and 39.3% for age ranges (16-39; 90-99), (40-49; 80-89), and (50-79), respectively (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Anticipated rate of SSRF can be calculated based on number of rib fractures, AIS-Chest, and age. The disproportionate rate of SSRF in patients age 50-69 with AIS-Chest 3 and age 50-79 with AIS-Chest > 3 should be further investigated, as lower frequency of SSRF in the other age ranges may lead to care inequalities.

Is Traumatic Anterior Stove-In Chest Truly so Rare? A Single Institution Experience

INTRODUCTION

The anterior stove-in chest (ASIC) is a rare form of flail chest involving bilateral rib or sternal fractures resulting in an unstable chest wall that caves into the thoracic cavity. Given ASIC has only been described in a handful of case reports, this study sought to review our institution's experience in the surgical management of ASIC injuries.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients with ASIC was conducted at our level I trauma center from 1//2021 to 3//2023. Information pertaining to patient demographics, fracture pattern, operative management, and outcomes was obtained and compared across patients in the case series.

RESULTS

6 patients met inclusion criteria, all males aged 37-78 years. 5 suffered motor vehicle collisions, and 1 was a pedestrian struck by an automobile. The median injury severity score was 28. All received ORIF within 5 days of admission, most commonly for ongoing respiratory distress. Patients 2 and 4 underwent bilateral ORIF of the ribs and sternum while patients 1, 5, and 6 underwent left-sided repair. Patient 3 required ORIF of left ribs and the sternum to stabilize their injuries. 5 of 6 patients were liberated from the ventilator and survived to discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates successful operative management of 6 patients with ASIC and suggests that early operative intervention with ORIF for affected segments may improve respiratory mechanics, ability to wean from the ventilator, and overall survival. Further research is needed to generate standardized guidelines for the management of this uncommon and complex thoracic injury.

Better late than never-a single-center review of delayed rib fixation for symptomatic rib fractures and nonunions

BACKGROUND

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRFs) has become an emerging therapy for treatment of patients with rib fractures. More commonly, it is used in the acute setting; however, delayed SSRF can be utilized for symptomatic rib fracture nonunions. Here, we describe our institution's experience with delayed SSRF, hypothesizing it is safe and resolves patient symptoms.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of patients presenting to our Level I trauma center to undergo delayed SSRF for symptomatic nonunions from January 2017 to September 2022. Delayed SSRF was defined as SSRF over 2 weeks in the outpatient setting. Basic demographics were obtained. Outcomes of interest included mean pain score (preoperatively and postoperatively), intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS), and resolution of preoperative symptoms, specifically chest wall instability, with return to activities of daily living (ADLs).

RESULTS

Forty-four patients met inclusion criteria with a total of 156 symptomatic nonunion rib fractures that received delayed SSRF. The average age was 59.2 ± 11.9 years and median number of days from injury to SSRF was 172.5 (interquartile range, 27.5-200). The average number rib fractures plated per patient 3.5 ± 1.8. Only three patients required ICU admission postoperatively for no longer than 2 days. Median hospital LOS was 2 days (interquartile range 1-3 days). Average preoperative and postoperative pain score was 6.8 ± 1.9 and 2.02 ± 1.5, respectively ( p < 0.001). Chest wall instability and preoperative symptoms resolved in 93.2% of patients postoperatively ( p < 0.001). Two patients (4.5%) had postoperative complications that resolved after additional surgical intervention. Rib fracture healing was demonstrated on radiographic imaging during postoperative follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Delayed SSRF is safe and demonstrates significant resolution of preoperative symptoms by decreasing pain, improving chest wall stability, and allowing patients to return to activities of daily living.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

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.

Perioperative considerations for patients undergoing surgical stabilization of rib fractures: A narrative review

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) has become an increasingly common management strategy for traumatic rib fractures. Although historically managed with supportive care, patients with multiple rib fractures and flail chest increasingly undergo SSRF, and so the anesthesiologist must be well-versed in the perioperative management and pain control for these patients, as controlling pain in this population is associated with decreased length of stay and improved outcomes. There are multiple modalities that can be used for both pain control and as part of the anesthetic plan in patients undergoing SSRF. This narrative review provides a comprehensive summary of anesthetic considerations for surgical rib fracture patients, covering the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods. We describe an approach to the assessment of high-risk patients, analgesic and anesthetic techniques including emerging techniques within locoregional anesthesia, ventilation strategies, and potential complications. This review also identifies areas where additional research is needed to ensure optimal anesthetic management for patients undergoing SSRF.

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures is associated with better return on investment for a health care institution than nonoperative management

BACKGROUND

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRFs) continues to gain popularity due to patient benefits. However, little has been produced regarding the economic benefits of SSRF and its impact on hospital metrics such as Vizient. The aim of this study was to explore these benefits hypothesizing SSRF will demonstrate positive return on investment (ROI) for a health care institution.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of all rib fracture patients over 5 years at our Level I trauma center. Patients were grouped into SSRF versus nonoperative management. Basic demographics were obtained including case mix index (CMI). Outcomes included narcotic requirements in morphine milliequivalents prior to discharge, mortality, and discharge disposition. Furthermore, actual hospital length of stay (ALOS) versus Vizient expected length of stay were compared between cohorts. Contribution margin (CM) was also calculated. Independent t-test, paired t-test, and linear regression analysis were performed, and significance set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 1,639 patients were included; 230 (14%) underwent SSRF. Age, gender, and Injury Severity Score were similar. Surgical stabilization of rib fracture patients had more ribs fractured (7 vs. 4; p < 0.001) and more patients with flail chest (43.5% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001). Surgical stabilization of rib fracture patients also had a significantly higher CMI (4.33 vs. 2.78; p = 0.001). Narcotic requirements and mortality were less in the SSRF cohort; 155 versus 246 morphine milliequivalents ( p < 0.001) and 1.7% versus 7.1% ( p = 0.003), respectively. Surgical stabilization of rib fracture patients were more likely to be discharged home (70.4% vs. 63.7%; p = 0.006). Surgical stabilization of rib fracture patients demonstrated shorter ALOS where nonoperative management patients demonstrated longer ALOS compared with Vizient expected length of stay. Contribution margins for SSRF patients were significantly higher and linear regression analysis showed a CM $1,128.14 higher per patient undergoing SSRF ( p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing SSRF demonstrate a significant ROI for a health care organization. Despite SSRF patients having a higher CMI, they were able to be discharged sooner than expected by Vizient calculations resulting in better a CM.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Evaluating the impact of timing to rib fixation in patients with traumatic brain injury: A nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

Early surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) is associated with improved inpatient outcomes in patients with multiple rib fractures. However, there is still a paucity of data examining the optimal timing of SSRF in patients with concomitant traumatic brain injury (TBI). This study aimed to assess whether earlier SSRF was associated with improved outcomes in patients with multiple rib fractures and TBI.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program 2017-2020, including adult patients with TBI and multiple rib fractures who had undergone SSRF. The outcomes were post-procedural length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, in-hospital mortality, ventilator days, and tracheostomy rate. Multilevel mixed-effects regression analyses accounting for patient, injury, and hospital characteristics as well as institutional SSRF volume were used to assess the association between timing to SSRF and the outcomes of interest. As a sensitivity analysis, propensity-score matching was performed to compare patients who underwent early (<72 hours) versus late SSRF (≥72 hours).

RESULTS

Of 1,041 patients included in this analysis, 430 (41.3%) underwent SSRF within the first 72 hours from admission. Delay to SSRF was associated with an increase in post-procedural LOS (partial regression coefficient (β) = 0.011; p = 0.036; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.001-0.023), longer hospital LOS (β = 0.053; p < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.042-0.064), prolonged ICU LOS (β = 0.032; p < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.025-0.038), and more ventilator days (β = 0.026, p < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.020-0.032).

CONCLUSION

In patients with concurrent multiple rib fractures and TBI, a delay in SSRF is associated with an increase in postprocedural LOS, hospital LOS, ICU LOS, and ventilator days. These findings suggest that the early patient selection and implementation of SSRF may play a beneficial role in patients presenting with concomitant TBI and multiple rib fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Does the timing of surgery affect outcomes in young and middle-aged patients undergoing surgical stabilization of rib fractures? Feedback was based on real data from physicians, patients, and family caregivers

BACKGROUND

There is a general clinical consensus that early surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF, ≤ 48-72 h after admission) can benefit patients, and this is only regarding the surgeon's opinions. This study assessed the true outcomes of young and middle-aged patients at different surgical timings.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted among patients aged 30-55 years who were hospitalized with a diagnosis of isolated rib fractures and underwent SSRF between July 2017 and September 2021. The patients were divided into early (≤ 3 days), mid- (4-7 days) and late (8-14 days) groups, according to the interval (days) between surgery and injury date. The impact of different surgical timings on clinical outcomes, patients, and families was assessed by comparing SSRF-related data during hospitalization and follow-up studies of clinicians, patients themselves, and family caregivers 1-2 months after surgery.

RESULTS

In this study, 155 complete patient data were finally included, including 52, 64, and 39 patients in the early, mid, and late groups, respectively. Length of operation, preoperative closed chest drainage rate, length of hospital stay, intensive care unit length of stay, duration of invasive mechanical ventilation in the early group were lower than those in the intermediate and late groups. Additionally, hemothorax and excess pleural fluid incidence after SSRF was lower in the early group than in the intermediate and late groups. Postoperative follow-up results showed that patients in the early group had higher SF-12 physical component summary scores and shorter duration of absence from work. Family caregivers had lower Zarit Burden Interview scores than those in the mid- and late groups.

CONCLUSION

From the experience of our institution's SSRF, early surgery is safe and offers additional potential benefits for young and middle-aged patients and families with isolated rib fractures.

In- and out-of-hospital outcomes following surgical stabilization of rib fractures in 80 years and older: A single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) has demonstrated benefit in patients with flail chest and multiple displaced fractures. There is mounting evidence for SSRF following chest wall injury (CWI) for the geriatric trauma population. A recent multi-center retrospective study highlighted a mortality benefit even for those patients aged 80 years and older. The objective of this investigation was to review our institutional experience with both in- and out-of-hospital outcomes within this patient population following SSRF.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients 80 years and older was performed at a high-volume level 2 trauma center from 2017 to 2021. SSRF volume is routinely >60 cases per year. Perioperative, inpatient, and outpatient data were collected as available. Primary outcomes were inpatient and 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included discharge on narcotics and freedom from narcotics at 30 days.

RESULTS

50 patients were included for review. Mean age was 86 years and mechanism of injury was most often fall. 28 of 50 (56%) patients had flail chest (radiographic). Mean number of ribs fixated was 4.7 and time to surgery 2.5 days. Inpatient mortality was 3/50 (6%), 90-day mortality was 9/50 (18%) of which three were attributable primarily to CWI (6/50, 12%). Of patients with follow-up of 1 year and beyond, 27/28 were alive (96%). With respect to narcotic consumption, 45% (21/47) were discharged on narcotics with 90% (28/31; N limited by missing data) being narcotic-free at 30 days.

CONCLUSION

In this high-risk patient population, inpatient mortality was comparably low to prior reports, though 90-day mortality was doubled when incorporating CWI-related deaths. Narcotic use was seen in the minority of patients upon discharge, and most progressed to being narcotic-free at 30 days post-hospitalization. Inpatient outcomes alone may not adequately define both the benefit and risk of SSRF performed in patients 80 years and older.

Intercostal nerve cryoablation during surgical stabilization of rib fractures decreases post-operative opioid use, ventilation days, and intensive care days

BACKGROUND

Intercostal nerve cryoablation is an adjunctive measure that has demonstrated pain control, decrease in opioid consumption, and decrease in hospital length of stay (LOS) in patients who undergo surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF).

METHODS

SSRF patients from January 2015 to September 2021 were retrospectively compared. All patients received multimodal pain regimens post-operatively and the independent variable was intraoperative cryoablation.

RESULTS

241 patients met inclusion criteria. 51 (21%) underwent intra-operative cryoablation during SSRF and 191 (79%) did not. Patients with standard treatment consumed 9.4 more daily MME (p = 0.035), consumed 73 percent more post-operative total MME (p = 0.001), spent 1.55 times as many days in the intensive care unit (p = 0.013), and spent 3.8 times as many days on the ventilator than patients treated with cryoablation, respectively. Overall hospital LOS, operative case time, pulmonary complications, MME at discharge, and numeric pain scores at discharge were no different (all p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Intercostal nerve cryoablation during SSRF is associated with fewer ventilator days, ICU LOS, total post-operative, and daily opioid use without increasing time in the operating room or perioperative pulmonary complications.

Application of preoperative 3D printing in the internal fixation of posterior rib fractures with embracing device: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

To explore the impact of preoperative 3D printing on the fixation of posterior rib fractures utilizing a memory alloy embracing device of rib under thoracoscopy.

METHODS

The enrolled patients were divided into the 3D printing (11 patients) and the non-3D printing (18 patients) groups, based on whether a 3D model of ribs was prepared prior to surgery. Analysis was conducted comparing the average fixation time per fracture, postoperative fixation loss, and poor reduction of fractured end between the two groups.

RESULTS

The average fixation time of each fracture was 27.2 ± 7.7 min in the 3D printing group and 29.3 ± 8.2 min in the non-3D printing group, with no statistically significant difference observed between the two groups (P > 0.05). The incidence of poor fracture fixation in the 3D printing group was statistically lower than that in the non-3D printing group (12.9% vs. 44.7%, P < 0.05). Further stratified analysis revealed that the off-plate rate in the 3D printing group and the non-3D group was (3.2% vs. 12.8%, P > 0.05), and the dislocation rate of the fractured end was (9.7% vs. 31.9%, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of 3D printing technology to prepare the rib model before surgery is proves beneficial in reducing the occurrence of poor fixation of fractures and achieving precise and individualized treatment.

Challenges in closing the gap between evidence and practice: International survey of institutional surgical stabilization of rib fractures guidelines

BACKGROUND

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) has gained increasing interest over the past decade, yet few candidates who could benefit from SSRF undergo operative management. We conducted an international survey of institutional SSRF guidelines comparing congruence between practice and contemporary evidence. We hypothesized that few guidelines reflect comprehensive evidence to facilitate standardized patient selection, operation, and postoperative management.

METHODS

A request for institutional rib fracture guidelines was distributed from the Chest Wall Injury Society. Surgical stabilization of rib fractures-specific guideline contents were extracted using a priori-designed extraction sheets and compared against 28 SSRF evidence-based recommendations outlined by a panel of 14 international experts. Fisher's exact test compared the proportion of strong and weak evidence-based recommendations specified within a majority of institutional guidelines to evaluate whether strength of evidence is associated with implementation.

RESULTS

A total of 36 institutions from 3 countries submitted institutional rib fracture management guidelines, among which 30 had SSRF-specific guidance. Twenty-eight guidelines (93%) listed at least one injury pattern criteria as an indication for SSRF, while 22 (73%) listed pain and 21 (70%) listed impaired respiratory function as other indications. Quantitative pain and respiratory function impairment thresholds that warrant SSRF varied across institutions. Few guidelines specified nonacute indications for SSRF or perioperative considerations. Seven guidelines (23%) detailed postoperative management but recommended timing and interval for follow-up varied. Overall, only 3 of the 28 evidence-based SSRF recommendations were specified within a majority of institutional practice guidelines. There was no statistically significant association ( p = 0.99) between the strength of recommendation and implementation within institutional guidelines.

CONCLUSION

Institutional SSRF guidelines do not reflect the totality of evidence available in contemporary literature. Guidelines are especially important for emerging interventions to ensure standardized care delivery and minimize low-value care. Consensus effort is needed to facilitate adoption and dissemination of evidence-based SSRF practices.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Comprehensive Review of Current Pain Management in Rib Fractures With Practical Guidelines for Clinicians

Rib fractures are present in 15% of all traumas and 60% of patients with chest traumas. Rib fractures are not life-threatening in isolation, but they can be quite painful which leads to splinting and compromise of respiratory function. Splinting limits the ability of a patient to take a deep breath, which leads to atelectasis, atelectasis to poor secretion removal, and poor secretion removal leads to pneumonia. Pneumonia is the common pathway to respiratory failure in patients with rib fractures. It is noted that in the elderly, each rib fracture increases developing pneumonia by 27% and the risk of dying by 19%. From a public health perspective, rib fractures have long-term implications with only 59% of patients returning to work at 6 months. In this review we will examine the state of art as it currently exists with regard to the management of pain associated with rib fractures. Included in this overview will be a brief review of the anatomy of the thorax and some important physiologic concepts, the latest trends in pharmacologic and noninvasive means of managing rib pain, a special section on epidural anesthesia, some other alternative invasive methods of pain control, and a review of the recent literature on rib plating. Finally, a practical, easy to follow guideline, to manage the patient with pain from rib fractures will be presented.

Hardware Infection From Surgical Stabilization of Rib Fractures Is Lower Than Previously Reported

Introduction Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) is an emerging therapy for the treatment of patients with traumatic rib fractures. Despite the demonstrated benefits of SSRF, there remains a paucity of literature regarding the complications from SSRF, especially those related to hardware infection. Currently, literature quotes hardware infection rates as high as 4%. We hypothesize that the hardware infection rate is much lower than currently published. Methods This is an IRB-approved, four-year multicenter descriptive review of prospectively collected data from January 2016 to June 2022. All patients undergoing SSRF were included in the study. Exclusion criteria included those patients less that 18 years of age. Basic demographics were obtained: age, gender, Injury Severity Score (ISS), Abbreviate Injury Scale-chest (AIS-chest), flail chest (yes/no), delayed SSRF more than two weeks (yes/no), number of patients with a pre-SSRF chest tube, and number of ribs fixated. Primary outcome was hardware infection. Secondary outcomes included mortality rate and hospital length of stay (HLOS). Basic descriptive statistics were utilized for analysis. Results A total of 453 patients met criteria for inclusion in the study. Mean age was 63 ± 15.2 years and 71% were male. Mean ISS was 17.3 ± 8.5 with a mean AIS-chest of 3.2 ± 0.5. Flail chest (three consecutive ribs with two or more fractures on each rib) accounted for 32% of patients. Forty-two patients (9.3%) underwent delayed SSRF. The average number of ribs stabilized was 4.75 ± 0.71. When analyzing the primary outcome, only two patients (0.4%) developed a hardware infection requiring reoperation to remove the plates. Overall HLOS was 10.5 ± 6.8 days. Five patients suffered a mortality (1.1%), all five with ISS scores higher than 15 suggesting significant polytrauma. Conclusion This is the largest case series to date examining SSRF hardware infection. The incidence of SSRF hardware infection is very low (<0.5%), much less than quoted in current literature. Overall, SSRF is a safe procedure with low morbidity and mortality.

Rib fractures in the elderly population: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multiple rib fractures are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in elderly patients. There is growing interest in surgical stabilization in this subgroup of patients. This systematic review compares conservative treatment to surgical fixation in elderly patients (older than 60 years) with multiple rib fractures. The primary outcome is mortality. Secondary outcomes include hospital and intensive care length of stay (HLOS and ILOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV) and pneumonia rates.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched for comparative studies reporting on conservative versus operative treatment for rib fractures in patients older than 60 years. Both observational studies and randomised clinical trials were considered.

RESULTS

Five observational studies (n = 2583) were included. Mortality was lower in operatively treated patients compared to conservative treatment (4% vs. 8%). Pneumonia rate and DMV were similar (5/6% and 5.8/6.5 days) for either treatment modality. Overall ILOS and HLOS of stay were longer in operatively treated patients (6.5 ILOS and 12.7 HLOS vs. 2.7 ILOS and 6.5 ILOS). There were only minimal reports on perioperative complications. Notably, the median number of rib fractures (8.4 vs. 5) and the percentage of flail chest were higher in operatively treated patients (47% vs. 39%).

CONCLUSION

It remains unknown to what extent conservative and operative treatment contribute individually to reducing morbidity and mortality in the elderly with multiple rib fractures. To date, the quality of evidence is rather low, thus well-performed comparative observational studies or randomised controlled trials considering all confounders are needed to determine whether operative treatment can improve a patient's outcome.

Thoracoscopic-assisted rib plating (TARP): initial single-center case series, including TARP in the super elderly, technical lessons learned, and proposed expanded indications

Objectives

The application of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) remains inconsistent due to evolving indications and perceived associated morbidity. By implementing thoracoscopic-assisted rib plating (TARP), a minimally invasive SSRF approach, we expanded our SSRF application to patients who otherwise might not be offered fixation. This report presents our initial experience, including fixation in super elderly (aged ≥85 years), and technical lessons learned.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study at a level 1 trauma center of admitted patients who underwent TARP between August 2019 and October 2020. Patient demographics, injury characteristics, surgical indications and outcomes are represented as mean±SD, median or percentage.

Results

A total of 2134 patients with rib fractures were admitted. In this group, 39 SSRF procedures were performed, of which 54% (n=21) were TARP. Average age was 68.5±16 years. Patients had a median of 5 fractured ribs, with an average of 1 rib that was bicortically displaced, and 19% presented with ‘clicking’ on inspiration. Patient outcomes were a mean hospital length of stay (LOS) of 11±3.7 days, mean postoperative LOS of 8 days, and mean intensive care unit LOS of 6.6±2.9 days. Five patients were ≥85 years old with a mean age of 90.8±4.7 years. They presented with an average of 4 rib fractures, of which an average of 2.4 ribs were plated. The procedure was well tolerated in this age group with a hospital LOS of 9.4±2 days, and all five patients were discharged to a rehab facility with no in-hospital mortalities.

Conclusion

Our experience incorporating TARP at our institution demonstrated feasibility of the technique and application across a broad range of patients. This approach and its application warrants further evaluation and potentially expands the application of SSRF.

.

Is There a Role for Rib Plating in Thoracic Trauma?

Rib fractures are a morbid consequence of blunt trauma and are associated with a highly variable clinical presentation ranging from nondisplaced rib fractures causing limited, manageable pain to severely displaced rib fractures with concomitant thoracic injuries leading to respiratory failure. Due to an evolution of techniques, hardware technology, and general acceptance, rib plating has increased substantially at trauma centers all throughout the United States over the past decade. This article aims to review the most recent and current reports for rib plating with respect to indications, preoperative evaluation and imaging, approaches, timing for intervention, outcomes in patients with flail chest and nonflail injuries, and the management of complications. From these data, it becomes clear that the surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) has a firm place in the management of thoracic trauma.

A decade of surgical stabilization of rib fractures: the effect of study year on patient selection, operative characteristics, and in-hospital outcome

BACKGROUND

Many centers now perform surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF). This single center study aimed to investigate temporal trends by year in patient selection, operative characteristics, and in-hospital outcomes We hypothesized that, over time, patient selection, time to SSRF, operative time, and in-hospital outcomes varied significantly.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained SSRF database (2010 to 2020) was performed. Patients were stratified by year in which they underwent SSRF. The primary outcome was operative time, defined in minutes from incision to closure. Secondary outcomes were patient and operative characteristics, and in-hospital outcomes. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess for temporal trends, corrected for confounders. The outcomes ventilator-, Intensive Care Unit-, and hospital-free days (VFD, IFD, and HFD, respectively) were categorized based on the group's medians, and complications were combined into a composite outcome.

RESULTS

In total, 222 patients underwent SSRF on a median of one day after admission (P₂₅-P₇₅, 0-2). Patients had a median age of 54 years (P₂₅-P₇₅, 42-63), ISS of 19 (P₂₅-P₇₅, 13-26), RibScore of 3 (P₂₅-P₇₅, 2-5), and sustained a median of 8 fractured ribs (P₂₅-P₇₅, 6-11). In multivariable analysis, increasing study year was associated with an increase in operative time (p<0.0001). In addition, study year was associated with a significantly reduced odds of complications (Odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI], 0.63-0.92; p=0.005), VFD < 28 days (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.65-0.92; p=0.003), IFD < 24 days (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66-0.91; p=0.002), and HFD < 18 days (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53-0.76; p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

In-hospital outcomes after SSRF improved over time. Unexpectedly, operative time increased. The reason for this finding is likely multifactorial and may be related to patient selection, onboarding of new surgeons, fracture characteristics, and minimally invasive exposures. Due to potential for confounding, study year should be accounted for when evaluating outcomes of SSRF.

Management of Advanced Aged Patients with Rib Fractures: Current Evidence and Review of the Literature

Elderly patients (age > 60 years old) represent the majority of the victims of major trauma, and rib fractures account for 10% of all trauma admissions. Due to the growing interest in surgical rib fixation and the lack of evidence on the best treatment available, we aimed to compare the conservative and operative approaches among the elderly population with multiple rib fractures. The systematic review identified seven eligible studies from over 321 papers collected through the database screening process. The mortality rate, considered the primary outcome, was higher in the conservative-treated group than the operatively-treated patients (8.3% vs. 3%). Considering the secondary outcomes investigated, the overall intensive care unit stay and in-hospital length of stay were longer in the operatively-treated patients (6.3 and 13.3 vs. 4.7 and 7.7, respectively). Conversely, the operative treatment showed favorable results regarding the pneumonia complication rate (5.8% vs. 9.6%), while the duration of mechanical ventilation was similar for both treatments. Surgical stabilization of rib fractures in the elderly population appears to be associated with a survival advantage and avoiding pulmonary complications. However, the individual contribution of operative and conservative treatment in reducing morbidity and mortality in the elderly with multiple rib fractures remains unclear.

What is the optimal timing to perform surgical stabilization of rib fractures?

The practice of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) for severe chest wall injury has exponentially increased over the last decade due to improved outcomes as compared to nonoperative management. However, regarding in-hospital outcomes, the ideal time from injury to SSRF remains a matter of debate. This review aims to evaluate and summarize currently available literature related to timing of SSRF. Nine studies on the effect of time to SSRF were identified. All were retrospective comparative studies with no detailed information on why patients underwent early or later SSRF. Patients underwent SSRF most often for a flail chest or ≥3 displaced rib fractures. Early SSRF (≤48-72 hours after admission) was associated with shorter hospital and intensive care unit length of stay (HLOS and ICU-LOS, respectively), duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV), and lower rates of pneumonia, and tracheostomy as well as lower hospitalization costs. No difference between early or late SSRF was demonstrated for mortality rate. As compared to nonoperative management, late SSRF (>3 days after admission), was associated with similar or worse in-hospital outcomes. The optimal time to perform SSRF in patients with severe chest wall injury is early (≤48-72 hours after admission) and associated with improved in-hospital outcomes as compared to either late salvage or nonoperative management. These data must however be cautiously interpreted due the retrospective nature of the studies and potential selection and attrition bias. Future research should focus on both factors and pathways that allow patients to undergo early SSRF.