High-energy blunt pelvic ring injuries and pre-hospital pelvic binder applications - A retrospective assessment based on a prospective registry.

INTRODUCTION

Application of a pelvic binder in the pre-hospital settings is a crucial step of high-energy blunt pelvic ring injury (PRI) management protocols. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the percentage of pre-hospital pelvic binder's applications in high-energy blunt type B or C PRI patients managed at a single level I trauma center, and to assess its impact on the medical resource requirements and patients' outcomes.

METHODS

The institutional Severely Injured Patients' Registry was screened for patients meeting the following inclusion criteria: (1) high-energy blunt PRI; (2) admission between 2014.01.01 and 2022.12.31; (3) age ≥16 years; and (4) available computed tomography of the pelvis. Exclusion criteria were: (1) death before admission; (2) low-energy injury; (3) penetrating, blast and electrical injuries; and (4) secondary transfers. Study variables, including pre-hospital application of a pelvic binder and demographic, clinical, management and outcome data were extracted from the registry. Additionally, AO/OTA classifications were determined.

RESULTS

A consecutive series of 262 patients was included into the final analysis. Of these, 58.8 % received a pre-hospital pelvic binder (PPB), increasing from type A (45.1 %) to type B (57.8 %) and type C (73.7 %). Pre-hospital hemodynamic instability was a major factor triggering the use of PPB in high-energy blunt type B PRI patients with PPB in 76.9 % of the cases with hemodynamic instability vs. 51.3 % of the cases without hemodynamic instability (p = 0.009). This difference was not statistically significant for high-energy blunt type C PRI patients (82.8 % vs. 64.3 %, p = 0.200). The presence of a physician on the trauma site contributed to the increased percentage of PRI managed with PPB from 43.5 % to 67.3 % in type B PRI (p = 0.011), and from 50 % to 77.1 % in type C PRI (p = 0.257). This study showed an increased need for packed red blood cells (PRBC) transfusions in subgroups treated with PPB and no statistically significant differences in term of intensive care unit (ICU) and total hospital length of stay and complications between high-energy blunt type B or C PRI patients with or without PPB. Comparison of mortality rates in patients with and without PPB showed a trend towards lower mortality rates with PPB in patients with AIS extremity participating in at least 50 % of the total ISS.

CONCLUSION

In the ideal pre-hospital scenario, every high-energy blunt type B or C PRI patient should be managed with a PPB. Continuous pre-hospital team training and information is crucial to achieve this goal. The preparation of Emergency Department and ICU who admit a patient with PPB should include a sufficient number of PRBC ready for transfusion. Mortality rates did not seem to be affected by PPB, except for a trend towards lower mortality rates in patients in whom their PRI was the major component of the global severity of their injury. This might point out the critical and positive effect of PPB in high-energy blunt PRI patients.