Search

Purpose: Open pelvic fractures have high mortality rates, and survivors may have ongoing functional deficits from severe trauma and invasive life-saving procedures. However, there are limited reports regarding the functional status evaluation following open pelvic fractures. We aimed to report the treatment experiences and short-term functional outcomes of patients with open pelvic fractures. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 19 consecutive patients with pelvic fractures who underwent treatment at a single institute between January 2014 and June 2018. The resuscitation protocol, osteosynthesis strategy, reduction quality of the pelvic ring, and functional outcomes were analyzed. Results: The incidence and mortality rates in patients with open pelvic fractures were 4.9 and 21.6%, respectively. Ten, one, and seven of the open wounds related to the pelvic fractures were located in Faringer zones I, II, and III, respectively. Fractures of four patients were categorized as classes 1 and 2, and those of 11 patients as class 3, according to the Jones–Powell classification. Eleven of 19 (57.9%) and 9 of 19 (47.5%) revealed excellent reduction quality by Matta/Torenetta and Lefaivre criteria, respectively. The Merle d'Aubigné score improved at each evaluation but stagnated after 24 months. The Majeed hip score also improved at the 12-month evaluation but the improvement stopped thereafter. At a 3-year follow-up, the patients with excellent reduction of the pelvic ring showed the highest functional performances. Conclusion: Improvements in functional status of patients with open pelvic fractures can be anticipated based on the reduction quality of the pelvis ring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Data on the functional outcomes of patients with open pelvic fractures after osteosynthesis are limited, and whether open fracture is a risk factor for worse outcomes, as compared with closed fracture, remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the functional outcomes of patients with open and closed pelvic fractures and evaluate potential factors that might affect outcomes. Methods: Overall, 19 consecutive patients with open pelvic fractures and 78 patients with closed pelvic fractures between January 2014 and June 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. All fractures were surgically treated, with a minimal follow-up period of three years. Patients' demographic profile, associated injuries, management protocol, quality of reduction, and outcomes were recorded and analyzed. Results: Patients with open pelvic fractures had higher new injury severity score, higher incidence of diverting colostomy, and longer length of stay. Both radiological and functional evaluations revealed no significant differences between the two groups at 1-year and 3-year evaluations. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified poor radiological outcomes (using Lefaivre criteria) and longer length of stay as risk factors for worse short-term functional outcomes. At 3-year evaluation, fair-to-poor radiological outcomes (using Matta/Tornetta and Lefaivre criteria) and the presence of diverting colostomy were potential risk factors. Conclusions: Compared with closed pelvic fracture, open pelvic fracture was not an indicator of worse functional outcomes. Functional outcomes may be comparable between patients with open and closed pelvic fractures at different time points within three years postoperatively. Achieving anatomical reduction in a fracture is crucial, because it might affect patient satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Correction to: World J Surg (2022) 46:568-576 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-021-06386-9 In the original online version of this article the percentage in the second sentence on page 572 was incorrect. The original article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-021-06386-9. [Extracted from the article]