Department of Trauma Surgery and Harald-Tscherne Laboratory, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Ramistr. 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2024 Jun;50(3):657-669. doi: 10.1007/s00068-023-02245-5. Epub 2023 Feb 23.
Although the term "major fracture" is commonly used in the management of trauma patients, it is defined insufficiently to date. The polytrauma section of ESTES is trying to develop a more standardized use and a definition of the term. In this process, a standardized literature search was undertaken. We test the hypothesis that the understanding of "major fractures" has changed and is modified by a better understanding of patient physiology.
A systematic literature search of the Medline and EMBASE databases was conducted in March 2022. Original studies that investigated surgical treatment strategies in polytraumatized patients with fractures were included: This included timing, sequence and type of operative treatment. A qualitative synthesis regarding the prevalence of anatomic regions of interest and core factors determining decision-making was performed. Data were stratified by decades.
4278 articles were identified. Of these, 74 were included for qualitative evaluation: 50 articles focused on one anatomic region, 24 investigated the relevance of multiple anatomic regions. Femur fractures were investigated most frequently (62) followed by pelvic (22), spinal (15) and tibial (15) fractures. Only femur (40), pelvic (5) and spinal (5) fractures were investigated in articles with one anatomic region of interest. Before 2010, most articles focused on long bone injuries. After 2010, fractures of pelvis and spine were cited more frequently. Additional determining factors for decision-making were covered in 67 studies. These included chest injuries (42), TBI (26), hemorrhagic shock (25) and other injury-specific factors (23). Articles before 2000 almost exclusively focused on chest injury and TBI, while shock and injury-specific factors (e.g., soft tissues, spinal cord injury, and abdominal trauma) became more relevant after 2000.
Over time, the way "major fractures" influenced surgical treatment strategies has changed notably. While femur fractures have long been the only focus, fixation of pelvic and spinal fractures have become more important over the last decade. In addition to the fracture location, associated conditions and injuries (chest trauma and head injuries) influence surgical decision-making as well. Hemodynamic stability and injury-specific factors (soft tissue injuries) have increased in importance over time.
尽管“主要骨折”一词在创伤患者的管理中经常使用,但迄今为止,它的定义还不够充分。ESTES 的多发伤部分正试图开发一种更标准化的用法和术语定义。在这个过程中,进行了标准化的文献检索。我们假设通过更好地了解患者生理机能,对“主要骨折”的理解已经发生变化并得到修正。
2022 年 3 月,对 Medline 和 EMBASE 数据库进行了系统的文献检索。纳入了研究多发创伤骨折患者手术治疗策略的原始研究:包括手术时机、顺序和类型。对与决策相关的解剖感兴趣区域的普遍性和核心因素进行了定性综合。根据十年期进行了数据分层。
共确定了 4278 篇文章。其中,74 篇文章被纳入定性评估:50 篇文章专注于一个解剖区域,24 篇文章研究了多个解剖区域的相关性。股骨骨折的研究最为频繁(62 篇),其次是骨盆(22 篇)、脊柱(15 篇)和胫骨(15 篇)骨折。只有股骨(40 篇)、骨盆(5 篇)和脊柱(5 篇)骨折在关注一个解剖区域的文章中进行了研究。2010 年之前,大多数文章都集中在长骨损伤上。2010 年之后,骨盆和脊柱骨折的报道更为频繁。67 项研究涵盖了其他决定决策的因素。这些因素包括胸部损伤(42 篇)、TBI(26 篇)、出血性休克(25 篇)和其他损伤特异性因素(23 篇)。2000 年之前的文章几乎仅关注胸部损伤和 TBI,而休克和损伤特异性因素(如软组织、脊髓损伤和腹部创伤)在 2000 年之后变得更加重要。
随着时间的推移,“主要骨折”对手术治疗策略的影响方式发生了显著变化。虽然股骨骨折一直是唯一的焦点,但骨盆和脊柱骨折的固定在过去十年中变得更加重要。除了骨折部位外,相关病症和损伤(胸部创伤和头部损伤)也会影响手术决策。随着时间的推移,血流动力学稳定性和损伤特异性因素(软组织损伤)的重要性不断增加。