Protocol for a randomized controlled trial on risk adapted damage control orthopedic surgery of femur shaft fractures in multiple trauma patients

Early total care or damage control orthopaedics for major fractures ? Results of propensity score matching for early definitive versus early temporary fixation based on data from the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society (TraumaRegister DGU®)

PURPOSE

Damage control orthopaedics (DCO) und early total care (ETC) are well-established strategies for managing severely injured patients. There is no definitive evidence of the superiority of DCO over ETC in polytrauma patients. We conducted this study to assess the probability of a polytraumatised patient undergoing DCO. In addition, the effect of DCO on complications and mortality was investigated.

METHODS

We analysed data from 12,569 patients with severe trauma (Injury Severity Score ≥ 16) who were enrolled in the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society (TraumaRegister DGU®) from 2009 to 2016 and had undergone surgery for extremity or pelvic fractures. These patients were allocated to a DCO or an ETC group. We used the propensity score to identify factors supporting the use of DCO. For a comparison of mortality rates, the groups were stratified and matched on the propensity score.

RESULTS

We identified relevant differences between DCO and ETC. DCO was considerably more often associated with packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusions (33.9% vs. 13.4%), catecholamine therapy (14.1% vs. 6.8%), lower extremity injuries (72.4% vs. 53.5%), unstable pelvic fractures (41.0% vs. 25.9%), penetrating injuries (2.8% vs. 1.5%), and shock (20.5% vs. 10.8%) and unconsciousness (23.7% vs. 16.3%) on admission. Based on the propensity score, patients with penetrating trauma, pRBC transfusions, unstable pelvic fractures, and lower extremity injuries were more likely to undergo DCO. A benefit of DCO such as reduced complications or reduced mortality was not detected.

CONCLUSION

We could identify some parameters of polytrauma patients used in the trauma registry (Traumaregister DGU®), which led more likely to a DCO therapy. The propensity score did not demonstrate the superiority of DCO over ETC in terms of outcome or complications. It did not appear to adequately adjust for the variables used here. Definitive evidence for or against the use of DCO remains unavailable.

Retrospective Analysis of Infection Factors in Secondary Internal Fixation after External Fixation for Open Fracture of a Long Bone: A Cohort of 117 Patients in a Two-Center Clinical Study

Purpose

To investigate infection risk factors after secondary internal fixation (IF) of open fracture of a long bone with removed fixation frame and explore the safe range of feasible operation for abnormal inflammatory indicators.

Methods

Clinical data of 117 cases of open fracture of a long bone that underwent temporary external fixation (EF) in one stage and IF in two stages were retrospectively analyzed. Collected data included age, sex, Gustilo type, multiple injuries, debridement time, duration of EF, needle infection, interval of conversion to IF after external fixator, preoperative white blood cell (WBC), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), albumin (ALB), blood glucose, and prognosis. We selected these factors for univariate analysis of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) and multivariate logistic regression analysis of statistically significant risk factors and created receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to compare the diagnostic efficiency of each index and determine the optimal screening point.

Results

We followed up 117 patients, with 130 limbs affected. Univariate analysis showed that ESR, CRP, ALB, WBC, EF time, and Gustilo fracture type were significantly associated with SSI. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that CRP, duration of EF, and Gustilo fracture type were independently associated with postoperative infection. Area under ROC curves for WBC, ESR, and CRP were 69.7%, 73.2%, and 81.2%.

Conclusions

We demonstrated the role of Gustilo classification of open fractures in predicting postoperative infection, especially for open fractures above type III. If the inflammatory indexes return to normal or show a downward trend, and the second-stage IF operation is performed within the cutoff values, postoperative recurrent infection was reduced.

Transforming the German ICD-10 (ICD-10-GM) into Injury Severity Score (ISS)-Introducing a new method for automated re-coding

Background

While potentially timesaving, there is no program to automatically transform diagnosis codes of the ICD-10 German modification (ICD-10-GM) into the injury severity score (ISS).

Objective

To develop a mapping method from ICD-10-GM into ICD-10 clinical modification (ICD-10-CM) to calculate the abbreviated injury scale (AIS) and ISS of each patient using the ICDPIC-R and to compare the manually and automatically calculated scores.

Methods

Between January 2019 and June 2021, the most severe AIS of each body region and the ISS were manually calculated using medical documentation and radiology reports of all major trauma patients of a German level I trauma centre. The ICD-10-GM codes of these patients were exported from the electronic medical data system SAP, and a Java program was written to transform these into ICD-10-CM codes. Afterwards, the ICDPIC-R was used to automatically generate the most severe AIS of each body region and the ISS. The automatically and manually determined ISS and AIS scores were then tested for equivalence.

Results

Statistical analysis revealed that the manually and automatically calculated ISS were significantly equivalent over the entire patient cohort. Further sub-group analysis, however, showed that equivalence could only be demonstrated for patients with an ISS between 16 and 24. Likewise, the highest AIS scores of each body region were not equal in the manually and automatically calculated group.

Conclusion

Though achieving mapping results highly comparable to previous mapping methods of ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes, it is not unrestrictedly possible to automatically calculate the AIS and ISS using ICD-10-GM codes.

Pin tract infection prophylaxis and treatment

Pin tract infection in external fixation (ExFix) is a frequent finding which can eventually lead to loosening, osteomyelitis and loss of fixation. Its diagnosis is based on high empiricism and low validity, although it is possible to distinguish between minor and major infection. The first is limited to soft tissues, whereas the latter includes bone involvement. The rate of infection after conversion of external fixation to intramedullary nailing (IMN) is not well known. Unfortunately, papers referring to infection after the conversion of ExFix to intramedullary nailing (IMN) are of evidence level IV or V. It is suggested that conversion of ExFix to IMN should be carried out in a 2 step regimen. The time interval of 2 step regimen is uncertain although some authors have recommended to occur within 9 days. There is no consensus as to which prophylaxis protocol should be applied prior to conversion. In order to throw more light into this important issue, registries capturing important related parameters to the development of infection should be established.

Are large fracture trials really possible? What we have learned from the randomized controlled damage control study?

PURPOSE

Although they are considered the 'gold standard' of evidence-based medicine, randomized controlled trials are still a rarity in orthopedic surgery. In the management of patients with multiple trauma, there is a current trend toward 'damage control orthopedics', but to date, there is no proof of the superiority of this concept in terms of evidence-based medicine. The purpose of this article is to present unexpected difficulties we encountered in successfully completing our randomized controlled trial and to discuss the problematic differences between theoretically planning a trial and real-life practical experience of implementing the plan, with attention to published strategies.

METHODS

The multicenter randomized controlled trial on risk adapted damage control orthopedic surgery of femur shaft fractures in multiple trauma patients (DCO study) was designed to determine whether 'risk adapted damage control orthopedics' of femoral shaft fractures is advantageous when treating multiple trauma patients. We compared our methods of study planning and realization point by point with published methods for conducting such trials.

RESULTS

The study was methodically planned. We met the most prerequisites for successfully completing a large fracture trial, but experienced unexpected difficulties. After 2.5 years, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft suspended the financing because of low recruitment. The reasons were multifactorial.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe it is much more difficult to perform a large fracture trial in reality than to plan it in theory. Even the theoretically best designed trial can prove unsuccessful in its implementation. The question remains: are large fracture trials even possible? Hopefully YES!

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10321620. Date assigned: 09/02/2007.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Randomized, controlled, two-arm, interventional, multicenter study on risk-adapted damage control orthopedic surgery of femur shaft fractures in multiple-trauma patients

Background

Long bone fractures, particularly of the femur, are common in multiple-trauma patients, but their optimal management has not yet been determined. Although a trend exists toward the concept of “damage control orthopedics” (DCO), current literature is inconclusive. Thus, a need exists for a more specific controlled clinical study. The primary objective of this study was to clarify whether a risk-adapted procedure for treating femoral fractures, as opposed to an early definitive treatment strategy, leads to an improved outcome (morbidity and mortality).

Methods/Design

The study was designed as a randomized controlled multicenter study. Multiple-trauma patients with femur shaft fractures and a calculated probability of death of 20 to 60 % were randomized to either temporary fracture fixation with external fixation and defined secondary definitive treatment (DCO) or primary reamed nailing (early total care). The primary objective was to reduce the extent of organ failure as measured by the maximum sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA) score.

Results

Thirty-four patients were randomized to two groups of 17 patients each. Both groups were comparable regarding sex, age, injury severity score, Glasgow Coma Scale, prothrombin time, base excess, calculated probability of death, and other physiologic variables. The maximum SOFA score was comparable (nonsignificant) between the groups. Regarding the secondary endpoints, the patients with external fixation required a significantly longer ventilation period (p = 0.049) and stayed on the intensive care significantly longer (p = 0.037), whereas the in-hospital length of stay was balanced for both groups. Unfortunately, the study had to be terminated prior to reaching the anticipated sample size because of unexpected low patient recruitment.

Conclusions

Thus, the results of this randomized study reflect the ambivalence in the literature. No advantage of the damage control concept could be detected in the treatment of femur fractures in multiple-trauma patients. The necessity for scientific evaluation of this clinically relevant question remains.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10321620

Date assigned: 9 February 2007.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1162-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Orthopaedic Timing in Polytrauma in a Second Level Emergency Hospital. An Overrated Problem?

The main concern for orthopaedic treatment in polytrauma has always been the same for almost forty years, which also regards "where" and "when" to proceed; correct surgical timing and correct interpretation of the DCO concept are still being debated. In the last few years, several attempts have been made to classify patients based on their clinical presentation and by trying to figure out which vital parameters are able to predict the patient's outcome. This study evaluated all patients who presented with code red at the Emergency Department of our Hospital, a level II trauma center. For every patient, the following characteristics were noted: sex, age, day of hospitalization, orthopaedic trauma, time to surgery, presence of an associated surgical condition in the fields of general surgery, thoracic surgery, neurosurgery and vascular surgery, cardiac frequency, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, Glasgow Coma Scale and laboratory data. All patients included were divided into subgroups based on orthopaedic surgical timing. Two other subgroups were also identified and analyzed in detail: deceased and weekend traumas. A total of 208 patients were included. Our primary goal was to identify a correlation between the mortality and surgical timing of the orthopaedic procedures; our secondary goal was to recognize, if present, a statistically relevant association between historical, clinical and laboratory data, and mortality rate, defining any possible risk factor. A correlation between mortality and orthopaedic surgical timing was not found. Analyzing laboratory data revealed an interesting correlation between mortality and: blood pressure, platelet count, cardiac frequency, hematocrit, hemoglobin and age.

Use of two grading systems in determining risks associated with timing of fracture fixation

BACKGROUND

The early appropriate care (EAC) protocol and clinical grading system (CGS) propose criteria that suggest timing of definitive fracture fixation by assessing risk for complications. This study applies these criteria to a cohort of patients with orthopedic injuries and determines clinical outcomes for groups stratified by risk and timing of fracture fixation.

METHODS

This retrospective work was performed at a Level I trauma center. Patients with operative femur, pelvis, acetabulum, and/or thoracolumbar spine injuries were included. Fractures were treated surgically, either early or delayed. Patients were retrospectively categorized into low- or high-risk groups using the EAC protocol and described as stable, borderline, unstable, or in extremis using a modified CGS (mCGS).

RESULTS

In the EAC analysis, low-risk patients treated early had fewer complications compared with delayed treatment. Among high-risk patients, no significant difference was noted. With the use of the mCGS, stable patients treated early had fewer complications compared with delayed patients. No difference in complications was detected for unstable and in extremis patients. Borderline patients treated early had fewer complications compared with delayed treatment, although results were not supported by sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

The EAC protocol can effectively distinguish patients who are at high risk for complications if treated early. Early treatment in the low-risk group was associated with fewer complications. The mCGS differentiates stable patients who benefit from early definitive treatment of fractures as well as severely injured patients (unstable or in extremis) who may benefit from damage-control orthopedics. Borderline patients may also benefit from early definitive treatment, but criteria defining borderline patients require further study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, level III.

The impact of major operative fractures in blunt abdominal injury

BACKGROUND

Abdominal injury has been shown to be an independent risk factor for pulmonary complications in patients with extremity injuries. We propose to characterize orthopedic patients with severe abdominal trauma. We hypothesize that operative fractures of the thoracolumbar spine, pelvis, acetabulum, or femur increase systemic complications in patients with blunt abdominal injury.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients presenting to a Level I trauma center with abdominal injury between 2000 and 2006 was performed. Adult patients between the ages of 18 years and 65 years with high-energy, blunt trauma resulting in severe abdominal injury (abdomen Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] score ≥ 3) and Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 18 or greater were included. Patients were divided into two comparison groups as follows: the fracture group had operative fractures of the pelvis, acetabulum, thoracolumbar spine, and/or femur, and the control group did not sustain these fractures of interest. Systemic complications were documented. Unadjusted and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The control group included 91 patients, and the fracture group included 106 patients with 136 fractures of interest. With unadjusted analysis, the fracture group had more complications (34% [36 of 106] vs. 18% [16 of 91], p = 0.010), including adult respiratory distress syndrome (8% [8 of 106] vs. 1% [1 of 91], p = 0.040), and sepsis (11% [12 of 106] vs. 3% [3 of 91], p = 0.056). Logistic regression modeling demonstrates that the presence of an operative fracture increased the odds of developing at least one complication approximately three times (odds ratio, 2.88, p = 0.006), after controlling for presence of chest injury and type of injured abdominal organ.

CONCLUSION

Operative fractures of the thoracolumbar spine, pelvis, acetabulum and femur increase the risk of developing systemic complications in patients with blunt abdominal injury. Further study is necessary to optimize treatment protocols for these high-risk patients.

Timing of definitive treatment of femoral shaft fractures in patients with multiple injuries: a systematic review of randomized and nonrandomized trials

BACKGROUND

Optimal timing of definitive treatment of femoral shaft fractures in patients with multiple injuries remains controversial. This study aimed to determine the impact of timing of definitive treatment (early, delayed, or damage-control orthopedics [DCO]) of femoral shaft fractures on the incidence of adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), mortality rate, and hospital length of stay (LOS) in patients with multiple injuries.

METHODS

A systematic review of published English-language reports using MEDLINE (1946-2011), Embase (1947-2011), and Cochrane Library. Search terms included femoral fractures, multiple trauma, fracture fixation, and time factors. This study reviewed randomized and nonrandomized studies that (1) compared early and delayed treatment or early treatment and DCO and (2) reported the incidence of ARDS, mortality rate, or LOS. Extraction of articles was performed by one of the authors using predefined data fields.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies met our inclusion criteria. Studies were grouped into heterogeneous injuries with early versus delayed treatment (17 studies), heterogeneous injuries with early versus DCO (8 studies), head injury (13 studies), and chest injury (7 studies). Most of the studies (≥ 50%) reporting ARDS and mortality rate showed no difference in each of these groups. However, 6 of 7 and 2 of 3 studies reporting LOS in the heterogeneous injuries with early versus delayed and heterogeneous injuries with early versus DCO, respectively, showed shorter stay for early treatment. Pooled analyses were not conducted owing to changes in critical care delivery during the study period and variations in definitions of early treatment, ARDS, and multiple injuries. Thirty-five reports were based on nonrandomized trials and were subject to biases inherent in retrospective studies. The review process was limited by language and publication status.

CONCLUSION

The literature suggests that early definitive treatment may be used safely for most patients with multiple injuries. However, a subgroup of patients with multiple injuries may benefit from DCO [corrected].

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, level III.