Open versus closed reduction and internal fixation in treatment of unstable pelvic fractures: a multicenter cohort study of long-term prognosis / 中华创伤骨科杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective:To compare the long-term prognosis between open versus closed reduction and internal fixation in the treatment of unstable pelvic fractures.Methods:The data of 402 consecutive patients with unstable pelvic fracture were retrospectively analyzed who had been treated at The First Medical Center and The Fourth Medical Center, PLA General Hospital, and Strategic Support Force Specialty Medical Center from March 2011 to March 2017. This cohort was divided into 2 groups according to the reduction methods. In the open group of 194 cases subjected to open reduction and internal fixation, there were 133 males and 61 females with a median age of 43.0 (30.7, 51.0) years, and 35 cases of type B and 159 cases of type C by the Tile classification. In the closed group of 208 cases subjected to closed reduction and internal fixation, there were 115 males and 93 females with a median age of 45.5 (32.0, 56.0) years, and 40 cases of type B and 168 cases of type C by the Tile classification. The 2 groups were compared in terms of 12-items Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) scores [physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS)] at the last follow-up, time from injury to operation, frequency of intraoperative X-ray fluoroscopy, intraoperative and postoperative blood transfusion, operation time, and quality of postoperative fracture reduction.Results:There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in the preoperative general data except for the gender, showing the 2 groups were comparable ( P>0.05). This cohort of 402 patients was followed up for 7.8(6.2, 8.8) years. At the last follow-up, the PCS [49.9 (45.4, 55.4) points] and MCS [53.1 (46.4, 57.6) points] in the closed group were significantly higher than those in the open group [48.2 (41.4, 52.7) and 46.5 (40.6, 53.6) points] ( P<0.05). The closed group incurred significantly shorter time from injury to operation [6 (5, 8) d] and operation time [180 (126, 260) min] than the open group [9 (6, 13) d and 240 (165, 334) min], significantly less intraoperative and postoperative blood transfusion [1.5 (0, 4.0) U] than the open group [5.0 (2.9, 8.0) U], significantly higher frequency of intraoperative X-ray fluoroscopy [104.5 (85.0, 132.0) times] than the open group [21.0 (18.0, 26.0) times], and a significantly higher excellent and good rate of postoperative fracture reduction (92.8%, 193/208) than the open group (86.6%, 168/194) (all P<0.05). Conclusion:In the treatment of patients with unstable pelvic fractures, compared with open reduction and internal fixation, closed reduction and internal fixation can not only significantly shorten the waiting time and operation time of patients, reduce the transfusion during operation, but also achieve better fracture reduction to ultimately improve the quality of life of patients.