Hildebrand Frank, Giannoudis Peter V, Griensven Martijn van, Zelle Boris, Ulmer Bastian, Krettek Christian, Bellamy Mark C, Pape Hans-Christoph
Department of Trauma Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.
Injury. 2005 Feb;36(2):293-302. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2004.08.012.
Blunt chest trauma represents one of the most common injuries in polytrauma patients. Blunt chest injury complicating polytrauma is associated with significant prolongation of intensive care stay. Further, it has a great impact on the timing of fixation of skeletal injuries, possibly contributing to adverse outcome. The purpose of this study is to assess whether there are any differences in the management and outcome of polytrauma patients with blunt chest trauma between trauma units in two different countries. Detailed information about advantages and disadvantages of these two systems might allow optimising the management of blunt chest trauma.
This investigation was performed using the polytrauma database of the German Trauma Society and the British Trauma Audit Research Network. After the definition of the inclusion abbreviated injury scale (AIS(chest) > or = 3) and injury severity score (ISS > 16) and exclusion (AIS(head/neck) > or = 2, referral from outside institutions) criteria, patients were recruited solely from these databases.
188 patients from the German database and 181 patients from the British database were enrolled in this study. Demographic data and injury pattern of the two patient populations did not significantly differ. The volume of initial red blood cell transfusion and length of the intensive care stay were significantly higher in Germany (p < 0.05). Mortality in the UK was 9% higher than in Germany (p = 0.057). Time to death in non-survivors was also significantly longer in Germany (p < 0.05).
The reasons for the differences regarding survival times and survival rates seem to be multiple. German patients received more red blood cells, had a longer hospital stay in intensive care and a better survival rate. The use of kinetic therapy in Germany, not standard in the UK, may contribute to a more favourable outcome.
钝性胸部创伤是多发伤患者中最常见的损伤之一。钝性胸部损伤并发多发伤会显著延长重症监护时间。此外,它对骨骼损伤固定的时机有很大影响,可能导致不良后果。本研究的目的是评估两个不同国家的创伤中心在多发伤合并钝性胸部创伤患者的管理和预后方面是否存在差异。关于这两种系统优缺点的详细信息可能有助于优化钝性胸部创伤的管理。
本研究使用了德国创伤协会和英国创伤审计研究网络的多发伤数据库。在定义了纳入标准(简明损伤定级标准(AIS(胸部)≥3)和损伤严重度评分(ISS>16))和排除标准(AIS(头部/颈部)≥2,来自外部机构的转诊)后,仅从这些数据库中招募患者。
本研究纳入了德国数据库中的188例患者和英国数据库中的181例患者。两组患者的人口统计学数据和损伤模式无显著差异。德国患者的初始红细胞输注量和重症监护时间显著更长(p<0.05)。英国的死亡率比德国高9%(p=0.057)。德国非幸存者的死亡时间也显著更长(p<0.05)。
生存时间和生存率存在差异的原因似乎是多方面的。德国患者接受了更多的红细胞输注,在重症监护病房的住院时间更长,生存率更高。在德国使用但在英国不标准的动态治疗可能有助于获得更有利的结果。