Earthquake-related pelvic crush fracture vs. non-earthquake fracture on digital radiography and MDCT: a comparative study

OBJECTIVE: To determine the features of earthquake-related pelvic crush fractures versus non-earthquake fractures with digital radiography and multidetector row computed tomography. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-seven survivors with pelvic crush fractures in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake were entered in our study as the earthquake-related group (139 underwent digital radiography, 28 underwent multidetector row computed tomography); 70 victims with non-earthquake pelvic fractures were enrolled into this study as the non-earthquake group (54 underwent digital radiography, 16 underwent multidetector row computed tomography). Data were reviewed retrospectively between groups, focusing on anatomic distributions, status of pelvic bone fractures, numbers of pelvic bones involved, and classification of pelvic ring fractures according to the Tile classification system. RESULTS: Pelvic fractures occurred more frequently in the pubis in the earthquake-related group than in the non-earthquake group (135/167, 81 percent vs. 48/70, 69 percent). In addition, comminuted fractures were more common in the earthquake-related group than in the non-earthquake group (55/167, 33 percent vs. 10/70, 14 percent). Multiple fractures were less common in the earthquake-related group than in the non-earthquake group (81/167, 49 percent vs. 46/70, 66 percent). Regarding the classification of pelvic ring fractures, Type C predominantly composed of subtype C3 occurred more frequently (64/167, 38 percent vs. 12/70, 17 percent), and Type A was less common in the earthquake-related group than in the non-earthquake group (31/167, 19 percent vs. 23/70, 32 percent). All differences were statistically significant (p<0.05). No difference was found in Type B fractures between the groups (72/167, 43 percent vs. 35/70, 50 percent). CONCLUSION: Earthquake-related pelvic crush fractures can be characterized by a high incidence of pelvic fractures occurring in the pubis, comminuted fractures, and Type C fractures predominantly composed by subtype C3, despite a low incidence of multiple fractures.

Thoracic Injuries in earthquake-related versus non-earthquake-related trauma patients: differentiation via Multi-detector Computed Tomography

PURPOSE: Massive earthquakes are harmful to humankind. This study of a historical cohort aimed to investigate the difference between earthquake-related crush thoracic traumas and thoracic traumas unrelated to earthquakes using a multi-detector Computed Tomography (CT). METHODS: We retrospectively compared an earthquake-exposed cohort of 215 thoracic trauma crush victims of the Sichuan earthquake to a cohort of 215 non-earthquake-related thoracic trauma patients, focusing on the lesions and coexisting injuries to the thoracic cage and the pulmonary parenchyma and pleura using a multi-detector CT. RESULTS: The incidence of rib fracture was elevated in the earthquake-exposed cohort (143 vs. 66 patients in the non-earthquake-exposed cohort, Risk Ratio (RR) = 2.2; p<0.001). Among these patients, those with more than 3 fractured ribs (106/143 vs. 41/66 patients, RR=1.2; p<0.05) or flail chest (45/143 vs. 11/66 patients, RR=1.9; p<0.05) were more frequently seen in the earthquake cohort. Earthquake-related crush injuries more frequently resulted in bilateral rib fractures (66/143 vs. 18/66 patients, RR= 1.7; p<0.01). Additionally, the incidence of non-rib fracture was higher in the earthquake cohort (85 vs. 60 patients, RR= 1.4; p<0.01). Pulmonary parenchymal and pleural injuries were more frequently seen in earthquake-related crush injuries (117 vs. 80 patients, RR=1.5 for parenchymal and 146 vs. 74 patients, RR = 2.0 for pleural injuries; p<0.001). Non-rib fractures, pulmonary parenchymal and pleural injuries had significant positive correlation with rib fractures in these two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic crush traumas resulting from the earthquake were life threatening with a high incidence of bony thoracic fractures. The ribs were frequently involved in bilateral and severe types of fractures, which were accompanied by non-rib fractures, pulmonary parenchymal and pleural injuries.

Comparative study of earthquake-related and non-earthquake-related head traumas using multidetector computed tomography

OBJECTIVE: The features of earthquake-related head injuries may be different from those of injuries obtained in daily life because of differences in circumstances. We aim to compare the features of head traumas caused by the Sichuan earthquake with those of other common head traumas using multidetector computed tomography. METHODS: In total, 221 patients with earthquake-related head traumas (the earthquake group) and 221 patients with other common head traumas (the non-earthquake group) were enrolled in our study, and their computed tomographic findings were compared. We focused the differences between fractures and intracranial injuries and the relationships between extracranial and intracranial injuries. RESULTS: More earthquake-related cases had only extracranial soft tissue injuries (50.7 percent vs. 26.2 percent, RR=1.9), and fewer cases had intracranial injuries (17.2 percent vs. 50.7 percent, RR = 0.3) compared with the non-earthquake group. For patients with fractures and intracranial injuries, there were fewer cases with craniocerebral injuries in the earthquake group (60.6 percent vs. 77.9 percent, RR = 0.8), and the earthquake-injured patients had fewer fractures and intracranial injuries overall (1.5 + 0.9 vs. 2.5 +1.8; 1.3 + 0.5 vs. 2.1 + 1.1). Compared with the non-earthquake group, the incidences of soft tissue injuries and cranial fractures combined with intracranial injuries in the earthquake group were significantly lower (9.8 percent vs. 43.7 percent, RR = 0.2; 35.1 percent vs. 82.2 percent, RR = 0.4). CONCLUSION: As depicted with computed tomography, the severity of earthquake-related head traumas in survivors was milder, and isolated extracranial injuries were more common in earthquake-related head traumas than in non-earthquake-related injuries, which may have been the result of different injury causes, mechanisms and settings.