Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Changes in the Management of Femoral Shaft Fractures in Polytrauma Patients: From Early Total Care to Damage Control Orthopedic Surgery
Hans-Christoph Pape, MD, Frank Hildebrand, MD, Stephanie Pertschy, MD, Boris Zelle, MD, Rayeed Garapati, MD, Kai Grimme, MD, and Christian Krettek, MD
Background: The optimal treatment of major fractures in patients with blunt multiple injuries continues to be discussed. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical course of polytrauma patients treated at a Level I trauma center within the last two decades regarding the effect of changes in the management of their femoral shaft fracture. Methods: In a retrospective cohort study performed at a Level I trauma center, the patients injuries and clinical outcomes were studied. Adult blunt polytrauma patients were included if a femoral shaft fracture eligible for intramedullary stabilization was stabilized (including external fixation) primarily < 8 hours after primary admission. Patients were separated according to the management strategies for the femur fracture (I intramedullary nailing [IIMN]; I external fixation [IEF]; I plate osteosynthesis [Iplate]) followed during a certain time period: (1) early total care (ETC) (January 1, 1981December 31, 1989) and early (< 24 hours) definitive stabilization; (2) intermediate (INT) (January 1, 1990 December 31, 1992) change in the protocol; or (3) damage control orthopedic surgery (DCO) (January 1, 1993December 31, 2000), early (< 24 hours) temporary stabilization, and secondary conversion to intramedullary nailing in patients at risk of organ failure. Results: The patient groups were comparable regarding age, gender distribution, and the mechanism of injury. Primary external fixation was performed significantly more frequent in the INT (23.9%) and DCO (35.6%) groups compared with the ETC group (16.6%) (p 0.02 ETC vs. DCO). Plating of the femur was almost abolished in the 1990s (DCO, 6.8%; ETC, 23.4%). In the subgroups categorized to IEF (ETC, 41.1 points; INT, 37.1 points; DCO, 39.1 points), the general injury severity was higher in comparison with the IIMN group (ETC, 38.3%; INT, 36.1%; DCO, 35.8%). Thoracic or abdominal injuries accounted for significantly higher numbers of patients submitted to IEF in the INT (13.6%, p 0.03) and DCO (17.3%, p 0.01) groups, compared with the ETC (8.1%) group. A higher incidence of reamed nailing was present in the ETC group compared with the other groups (ETC, 96.1%; INT, 73.7%; DCO, 13.5%). No significant differences in the incidence of local complications were found. The incidence of multiple organ failure decreased significantly from the ETC to the DCO period regardless of the type of treatment of the femoral fracture. Moreover, there was a significantly higher incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) when IIMN (15.1%) and IEF (9.1%) in the DCO subgroup were compared. Conclusion: A significant reduction in the incidence of general systemic complications regardless of the type of femur fixation used was found when comparing the time periods of 1981 to 1989 (ETC), 1990 to 1992 (INT), and 1993 to 2000 (DCO). The change in treatment protocols to external fixation and from reamed to unreamed nailing was not associated with an increased rate of local complications (pin-track infections, delayed unions, nonunions). Among other causes for the improved general outcome during the most recent time period (DCO), an increase in the frequency of air rescue, a change from reamed to unreamed nailing, and an increased awareness toward thoracic and abdominal injuries may have played a role. Even during the DCO era, IMN was associated with a higher rate of ARDS than IEF. In view of a lower complication rate despite higher injury severity compared with the ETC period, the introduction of DCO appears to be an adequate alternative for patients at high risk of developing posttraumatic systemic complications such as ARDS and multiple organ failure. Key Words: Blunt multiple trauma, Damage control orthopedics, Major fractures, Femoral shaft fractures, Operative treatment.
J Trauma. 2002;53:452462.
he immediate and complete definitive operative care of all fractures represents the optimal treatment for the patient with multiple orthopedic injuries. The benefits of this approach have been demonstrated in numerous studies within the past two decades.1 4 However, certain exceptions have been discussed in the past few years, where the principle of early total care may not
be beneficial (head and chest trauma, high Injury Severity Score [ISS] predisposing to posttraumatic complications, borderline patients).5 8 In these, the surgical burden may even increase the risk of postoperative complications.9 11 For these patients, the concept of initial temporary fixation and secondary conversion to a definitive procedure has recently
From the Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Hannover Medical School (H.-C.P., F.H., S.P., B.Z., K.G., C.K.), Hannover, Germany, and Department of Orthopaedics, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (R.G.), New York, New York. Address for reprints: Hans-Christoph Pape, MD, Department of Trauma Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Carl Neubergstr. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany; email: pape.hans-christoph@mh-hannover.de. DOI: 10.1097/01.TA.0000025660.37314.0F
Submitted for publication September 24, 2001. Accepted for publication January 9, 2002. Copyright 2002 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc. This work was scheduled for presentation at the 61st Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma, which was canceled because of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
452
September 2002
hour chest radiograph. The diagnosis was made regardless of the presence or absence of rib fractures.22 The diagnosis of shock was made when the systolic blood pressure dropped below 90 mm Hg despite volume treatment and catecholamine infusions. Pin-track infection and wound infection were diagnosed according to Greens criteria.23
Treatment Protocols
The trauma protocol used at our institution foresees that a long bone fracture is classified as an emergency that has to be stabilized acutely (at least 8 hours) either by internal operations or by external fixation. Thus, a patient who is in critical condition because of another associated injury may undergo laparotomy or craniotomy first and then be submitted to stabilization of the long bone fracture.17 A patient who is highly unstable during this procedure may undergo external fixation parallel to the abdominal/cranial operation or may be transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU), where an external fixateur is then placed (Fig. 1).18 We do not place a patient on the intensive care unit before the operative procedure for improvement of the general condition, but without stabilization of the fracture.
Inclusion Criteria
The inclusion criteria for all patients were as follows: age 19 to 65 years, blunt multiple trauma, ISS of 18 or more, presence of a femoral shaft fracture eligible for intramedullary stabilization, and primary surgery begun at 8 hours after admission, including external fixation for major fractures.
Data Collection
From the database, demographic data were used. In addition, clinical parameters of organ function and therapy reflecting the posttraumatic course were documented (incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome [ARDS], ICU complications).
Definitions
The severity of injury was categorized preoperatively using the ISS.19 The initial neurologic state was evaluated according to the Glasgow Coma Scale score.20 Primary surgery was defined as an operative intervention within 24 hours posttrauma. Multiple organ failure was defined according to the criteria of Moore et al.21 Lung contusion was defined as a parenchymal pulmonary lesion diagnosed on initial chest computed tomographic scan (lung contusion) or by radiologic findings on the 24Volume 53 Number 3
Group Distribution
Three different time periods were identified: 1. Early total care (ETC) (patients treated between January 1, 1981, and December 31, 1989). The protocol for the treatment of the femoral shaft fracture was early ( 24 hours) definitive stabilization. 2. Intermediate period (INT) (patients treated between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 1992). During this period, a change in the usual protocol for the treatment of the femoral shaft fracture in patients with multiple 453
No. of patients Mean age (yr) Sex (M/F) Mechanism MVC Pedestrian Motorcyclist Other Mean rescue time (min) Type of rescue system Helicopter Ambulance
235 32.7 127/108 177 (75.3) 027 (11.5) 028 (11.9) 003 (1.3) 068 039 (16.6) 196 (83.4)
191 29.9 102/89 153 (80.1) 019 (9.9) 017 (8.9) 002 (1.1) 048 121 (63.4) 070 (36.6)
NS NS NS NS NS NS NS 0.01 0.03
MVC, motor vehicle crash. * The p value indicates the comparison of the rescue systems between the ETC period and the DCO period.
injuries at risk of posttraumatic complications occurred from early ( 24 hours) definitive stabilization toward early temporary fixation. 3. Damage control orthopedic surgery (DCO) (patients treated between January 1, 1993, and December 31, 2000). The usual protocol for the treatment of the femoral shaft fracture in patients with multiple injuries at risk of posttraumatic complications was early ( 24 hours) temporary stabilization, followed by secondary conversion to intramedullary nailing. Moreover, three subgroups were identified according to the type of femur fixation: IIMN (intramedullary instrumentation within 8 hours after admission), IEF (IIIMN) (external fixation within 8 hours after admission), and Iplate (plate osteosynthesis within 8 hours after admission).
RESULTS
Patients were included if they were injured between January 1, 1981, and December 31, 2000; 514 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The demographic data demonstrate comparable patient groups regarding age, gender distribution, and mechanism of injury. The mean rescue time indicates a tendency toward a more rapid primary admission to our unit in the INT and DCO groups compared with ETC patients. This difference was not significant. There was a significant difference in the ratio between patients rescued by helicopter versus ambulances between the ETC period and the DCO period (Table 1).
hemipelvectomy. During the INT period, the one who had his femur not stabilized also died of cerebral herniation. During the DCO period, two of three patients who did not undergo femoral stabilization died of head injury hours after admission to the ICU; one patient who had been rolled over had crush injuries of his thoracic and abdominal organs and died hours after admission to the ICU. The mean ISS in these patients was 67. We have therefore felt that the small number of patients and the overall severity of their injuries does not provide useful information for the general treatment of these fractures. According to our database, 11 patients were excluded because the time interval between admission and the beginning of the first surgical intervention exceeded 8 hours. Among these were five patients during the ETC period (mean ISS, 41 points; three died from head trauma), three patients during the INT period (mean ISS, 48 points; two died from their severe chest injuries 24 hours), and three patients during the DCO period (mean ISS, 51 points; two died from head trauma 24 hours). Table 2 lists the group distribution regarding the type of femur fixation. The percentage of primary intramedullary fixations was comparable during all three time periods. Primary external fixation was performed significantly more frequently in the INT and DCO groups compared with the ETC group. Plating of the femur was almost abolished in the period from 1993 to 2000 (Table 2). There were significantly higher mean injury severities of the head and the chest compared with the other anatomic regions. These occurred in IEF patients in all time periods. All other Abbreviated Injury Scale values demonstrated no statistically significant differences between the subgroups or between the time periods. The general injury severity was higher in patients categorized to IEF in comparison with the IIMN group. There was a trend toward lower ISS in those patients submitted to IIMN in the years 1993 to 2000 comSeptember 2002
NS 0.02 0.003
* The p values in the table indicate the comparison between ETC and DCO. The p values between groups INT and DCO are 0.05 for the IIMN patients, 0.04 for the IEF patients, and 0.02 for I plate patients.
pared with the previous time periods. This trend was statistically significant at p 0.05 between the ETC and DCO groups. A similar trend occurred in the group experiencing plate osteosynthesis (Table 3). The percentages of patients in whom the indications for external fixation were head injury or hemorrhagic
shock did not change during the different time periods. Thoracic or abdominal injuries accounted for significantly higher numbers of patients submitted to IEF in the INT and DCO groups, compared with the ETC group (Table 4). The general techniques for intramedullary stabilization did not change during the three time periods. The numbers of
AIS head IIMN IEF, IIIMN Iplate AIS face IIMN IEF, IIIMN Iplate AIS thorax IIMN IEF, IIIMN Iplate AIS abdomen IIMN IEF, IIIMN Iplate AIS extremity IIMN IEF, IIIMN Iplate AIS external IIMN IEF, IIIMN Iplate ISS IIMN IEF, IIIMN Iplate
2.1 2.9 2.3 0.8 0.4 0.8 3.8 4.1 2.8 1.2 1.1 1.4 3.9 4.2 3.4 0.7 0.3 0.4 38.3 41.1 38.4
2.2 3.0 2.4 0.4 0.6 0.8 3.4 4.0 2.9 1.3 1.0 1.2 3.7 4.4 2.8 0.4 0.5 0.3 36.1 37.1 34.1
2.1 2.9 2.2 0.6 0.6 0.4 2.6 3.8 3.4 1.4 1.2 1.7 3.9 4.3 3.0 0.6 0.7 0.5 35.8 39.1 33.1
* The p values in the table indicates differences between ETC and DCO. Indicates p values below 0.05 in comparison between group IIMN and the other subgroups.
* Statistically significant differences between the DCO group and the other groups (p
Volume 53 Number 3
455
IMN antegrade IMN retrograde Percentage of reamed IMN Mean duration of EF (days)
* Statistically significant differences between the DCO group and the other groups (p
antegrade/retrograde nailings and the mean duration of EF were comparable. There was a higher incidence of reamed nailing in the ETC group compared with the other groups (Table 5). Table 6 documents no significant differences in the incidence of local complications, infections, or hardware failure despite the treatment changes over the years. As demonstrated in Table 7, there was no significant change in the hospital stay between the subgroups. The incidence of postinjury multiple organ failure (MOF) decreased significantly from the ETC to the DCO period, regardless of the type of treatment of the femoral fracture. Moreover, there was a significantly higher incidence of MOF in comparing IIMN and IEF in the DCO subgroup. A similar distribution occurred regarding the incidence of ARDS (Table 7). The patients listed in Table 7 in subgroup IEF are the ones in whom conversion to an intramedullary device was performed later.
Statistical Analysis
Data were tested for normal distribution. Differences between groups were compared by two-way analysis of vari-
Pin-track infection Wound infection Osteomyelitis Hardware failure EF IMN/Plate Delayed union Nonunion
NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
Hospital stay IIMN IEF, IIIMN Iplate MOF IIMN IEF; IIIMN Iplate ARDS IIMN IEF, IIIMN Iplate
5 2 1
5 4 3
4 3 4
* p values indicate significant differences between ETC and DCO. Indicates a significant (p 0.05) difference between IIMN vs. IEF.
456
September 2002
DISCUSSION
The question of optimal timing of definitive fracture stabilization represents a continuing challenge to all physicians involved in the care of severely injured patients. It would be ideal to perform a prospective randomized trial in groups of patients that sustained identical injuries, underwent identical rescue conditions, presented with comparable injury severities and injury distributions, and were treated favorably in a single trauma center. Court-Brown criticized previous retrospective studies8 in that the patient groups were not comparable and suggested that a prospective study should be performed.24 However, even if the goals discussed above were achievable, several factors continued to be uncontrolled, namely, the influence of age, gender differences, and differences in rescue conditions. Moreover, the impact of a surgical procedure has been discussed to be clinically relevant, especially in those patients who have a high risk of developing posttraumatic complications (e.g., high ISS, severe singleorgan injury).25 The unavailability of a sufficiently high patient number meeting the inclusion criteria within an acceptable period of time appears to be a major obstacle.26 In this light, the aim of the current retrospective study was to investigate whether the changes in the treatment of femur shaft fractures affected the clinical course in patients with multiple blunt injuries. The first main result indicates that the incidence of posttraumatic systemic complications decreased significantly within the study period in three patient groups that underwent different types of treatment for a femoral shaft fracture, although demonstrating similar demographic data, Injury Severity Scores, and rescue conditions. This tendency occurred regardless of the type of fracture fixation. The second main result demonstrates that in patients submitted to IEF, the incidence of posttraumatic local and systemic complications was comparable with those assigned to IIMN, even though their Injury Severity Scores were higher. The third main finding is an increased incidence of ARDS in patients during the damage control era, when they were submitted to primary intramedullary stabilization of the femur shaft when compared with external fixation. This finding was not associated with a higher mortality in this subgroup. Moreover, the relative percentage of patients who developed ARDS decreased from 54.6% (ETC) to 26.4% (DCO) when IIMN was performed and decreased from 97.4% (ETC) to 22.1% when IEF was performed. This may demonstrate that different indications for IEF were chosen over the different time periods. Volume 53 Number 3
9.
13.
14. 15.
16.
17.
18.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This manuscript is dedicated to the retirement of Harald Tscherne, who had the first University Chair for Unfallchirurgie in Germany since 1970. His influence vividly stimulated the development of trauma and orthopedic surgery in Germany. His concepts yielded the way for the strategies described in this manuscript. He resigned in October 2000, having fulfilled 30 years of trauma leadership in Europe.
19.
20. 21.
REFERENCES
1. Johnson KD, Cadambi A, Seibert B. Incidence of adult respiratory distress syndrome in patients with multiple musculoskeletal injuries: effect of early operative stabilization of fractures. J Trauma. 1985; 25:375381. Bone LB, Johnson KD, Weigelt J, et al. Early versus delayed stabilization of fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71:336 339. Seibel R, LaDuca J, Hassett JM, et al. Blunt multiple trauma (ISS 36), femur traction, and the pulmonary failure-septic state. Ann Surg. 1985;202:283295. Pape H-C, AufmKolk M, Paffrath T, et al. Primary intramedullary fixation in polytrauma patients with associated lung contusion: a cause of posttraumatic ARDS? J Trauma. 1993;34:540 548. Nast-Kolb D, Waydhas C, Jochum M, Spannagl M, Duswald K-H, Schweiberer L. Is there a favorable time for the management of femoral shaft fractures in polytrauma? [in German]. Chirurg. 1990; 61:259 265. Pelias ME, Townsend MC, Flancbaum L. Long bone fractures predispose to pulmonary dysfunction in blunt chest trauma despite early operative fixation. Surgery. 1992;111:576 579. Schller W, Gaudernack T. Lungenkomplikationen nach Oberschenkelmarknagelung. Hefte Unfallheilkunde. 1986;182:273 278.
22.
2. 3.
4.
26.
5.
27.
28.
6.
29.
7.
460
September 2002
31.
32.
33.
EDITORIAL COMMENT
One of the major beneficial evolutions in trauma care over the past decade has been the concept of damage control surgery. As we have improved our understanding of the circulatory response to hemorrhage and have accordingly refined our resuscitative strategies, trauma surgeons have moved away from the concept of early definitive operative repair of intra-abdominal,1,2 vascular,3,4 and orthopedic injuries.5 Instead, it has become increasingly apparent that focusing on complete and effective resuscitation of the patient carries a much higher priority than definitive surgical repairs. To some degree, we have known this principle for a much longer time than the past decade, because relatively low priority injuries such as facial fracture fixations have been operatively addressed in a delayed manner at most trauma centers for several decades. What has changed in recent years is the broader application of this principle of delayed definitive management to injuries of all types in severely injured patients. Dr. Pape and colleagues have provided a useful retrospective view of the evolution of femoral shaft fracture management for 514 severely injured patients admitted to a single Level I German trauma center over a 26-year period. The major point of the article is that the transition from primary definitive femoral fixation (using intramedullary instrumentation) to a damage control approach (with temporary stabilization followed by secondary conversion to intramedullary nailing) has been associated with a reduction in the incidence of both multiple organ failure and ARDS. Moreover, despite the increased use of external fixation and delayed definitive repair, there was not an increase in the local complication rate. While encouraging that such improvements in outcome can be detected, it is important to note that they occurred in an environment and over a time period that has been characterized by change. For example, over this same time period, the authors noted that the use helicopter transports increased from 16.6% to 63.4%, with a corresponding decline in ambulance transports. No doubt other changes in management have occurred over this long time period, including the areas of hemodynamic monitoring and support, ventilator therapy, antibiotic agents, and nutrition, to name but a few. The specific impact of the orthopedic management on the incidence of organ failure is difficult to tease out of such a 461
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48. 49.
Volume 53 Number 3
REFERENCES
Morris JA Jr, Eddy VA, Blinman TA, Rutherford EJ, Sharp KW. The staged celiotomy for trauma: issues in unpacking and reconstruction. Ann Surg. 1993;217:576 586. 2. Rotondo MF, Schwab CW, McGonigal MD, et al. Damage control: an approach for improved survival in exsanguinating penetrating abdominal injury. J Trauma. 1993;35:375383. 3. Reilly PM, Rotondo MF, Carpenter JP, Sherr SA, Schwab CW. Temporary vascular continuity during damage control: intraluminal shunting for proximal superior mesenteric artery injury. J Trauma. 1995;39:757760. 4. Porter JM, Ivatury RR, Nassoura ZE. Extending the horizons of damage control in unstable trauma patients beyond the abdomen and gastrointestinal tract. J Trauma. 1997;42:559 561. 5. Henry SM, Tornetta P 3rd, Scalea TM. Damage control for devastating pelvic and extremity injuries. Surg Clin North Am. 1997; 77:879 895. 1.
462
September 2002