R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
J Orthop Trauma. 2010 Oct;24(10):603-9. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181d3cb6b.
The objectives of this study were to evaluate the ability of the Young-Burgess classification system to predict mortality, transfusion requirements, and nonorthopaedic injuries in patients with pelvic ring fractures and to determine whether mortality rates after pelvic fractures have changed over time.
Retrospective review.
Level I trauma center.
One thousand two hundred forty-eight patients with pelvic fractures during a 7-year period.
None.
Mortality at index admission, transfusion requirement during first 24 hours, and presence of nonorthopaedic injuries as a function of Young-Burgess pelvic classification type. Mortality compared with historic controls.
Despite a relatively large sample size, the ability of the Young-Burgess system to predict mortality only approached statistical significance (P = 0.07, Kruskal-Wallis). The Young-Burgess system differentiated transfusion requirements--lateral compression Type 3 (LC3) and anteroposterior compression Types 2 (APC2) and 3 (APC3) fractures had higher transfusion requirements than did lateral compression Type 1 (LC1), anteroposterior compression Type 1 (APC1), and vertical shear (VS) (P < 0.05)--but was not as useful at predicting head, chest, or abdomen injuries. Dividing fractures into stable and unstable types allowed the system to predict mortality rates, abdomen injury rates, and transfusion requirements. Overall mortality in the study group was 9.1%, unchanged from original Young-Burgess studies 15 years previously (P = 0.3).
The Young-Burgess system is useful for predicting transfusion requirements. For the system to predict mortality or nonorthopaedic injuries, fractures must be divided into stable (APC1, LC1) and unstable (APC2, APC3, LC2, LC3, VS, combined mechanism of injury) types. LC1 injuries are very common and not always benign (overall mortality rate, 8.2%).
本研究旨在评估 Young-Burgess 分类系统预测骨盆环骨折患者死亡率、输血需求和非骨科损伤的能力,并确定骨盆骨折后的死亡率是否随时间发生变化。
回顾性研究。
一级创伤中心。
7 年内共 1248 例骨盆骨折患者。
无。
入院时死亡率、前 24 小时内输血需求以及 Young-Burgess 骨盆分类类型与非骨科损伤的关系。与历史对照比较死亡率。
尽管样本量较大,但 Young-Burgess 系统预测死亡率的能力仅接近统计学意义(P=0.07,Kruskal-Wallis)。Young-Burgess 系统区分了输血需求——横向挤压型 3 型(LC3)和前后挤压型 2 型(APC2)和 3 型(APC3)骨折比横向挤压型 1 型(LC1)、前后挤压型 1 型(APC1)和垂直剪切(VS)骨折的输血需求更高(P<0.05)——但在预测头部、胸部或腹部损伤方面并不那么有用。将骨折分为稳定型和不稳定型可使该系统预测死亡率、腹部损伤率和输血需求。研究组的总死亡率为 9.1%,与 15 年前原始 Young-Burgess 研究相比无变化(P=0.3)。
Young-Burgess 系统可用于预测输血需求。要使该系统预测死亡率或非骨科损伤,必须将骨折分为稳定型(APC1、LC1)和不稳定型(APC2、APC3、LC2、LC3、VS、混合损伤机制)。LC1 损伤很常见且并非总是良性(总体死亡率为 8.2%)。