Fat Embolism Syndrome and in-Hospital Mortality Rates According to Patient Age: A Large Nationwide Retrospective Study.

Introduction: Fat embolism syndrome (FES) is a rare life-threatening condition that can develop after traumatic orthopedic injuries. Controversy remains concerning the epidemiology in the elderly population. Therefore, this study aims to report FES related to in-hospital mortality stratified by age. Methods: A retrospective trauma cohort study was conducted using data from the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) from 2007 to 2014. All FES cases were included in the study with the diagnosis of FES (ICD9 958.1). Death on arrival cases were excluded. Patients were stratified by age cohort: less than 40 (G1), 40-64 (G2), and greater than 65 (G3) years of age. The primary outcome evaluated was in-hospital mortality. Multivariable regression models were performed to adjust for potential confounders. Results: Between 2007 and 2014, 451 people from a total of 5,836,499 trauma patients in the NTDB met the inclusion criteria. The incidence rate was 8 out of 100,000. The inpatient mortality rate was 11.8% for all subjects with the highest mortality rate of 17.6% in patients over 65. Multivariable analyses demonstrated that age greater than 65 years was an independent predictor of mortality (aOR 24.16, 95% CI 3.73, 156.59, p=0.001), despite higher incidence and injury severity of FES among patients less than 40. No significant association with length of hospital stay, length of intensive unit care, or length of ventilation use was found between the groups. Subgroup analysis of the elderly population also showed a higher mortality rate for FES in femoral neck fracture patients (18%) than other femoral fractures (14%). Conclusion: In this retrospective cohort analysis, old age (≥ 65 years) was found to be an independent risk factor for in-hospital mortality among fat embolism syndrome patients. Elderly patients specifically with femoral neck fractures should be monitored for the development of FES.

Trauma Center Outcomes After Transition From Level 2 to Level 1: A National Trauma Data Bank Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous US-based studies have shown that a trauma center designation of level 1 is associated with improved patient outcomes. However, most studies are cross-sectional, focus on volume-related issues and are direct comparisons between levels. This study investigates the change in patient characteristics when individual trauma centers transition from level 2 to level 1 and whether the patients have similar outcomes during the initial period of the transition. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study that analyzed hospital and patient records included in the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2016. Patient characteristics were compared before and after their hospitals transitioned their trauma level. Mortality; complications including acute kidney injury, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac arrest with CPR, deep surgical site infection, deep vein thrombosis, extremity compartment syndrome, surgical site infection, osteomyelitis, pulmonary embolism, and so on; ICU admission; ventilation use; unplanned returns to the OR; unplanned ICU transfers; unplanned intubations; and lengths of stay were obtained following propensity score matching, comparing posttransition years with the last pretransition year. RESULTS: Sixteen trauma centers transitioned from level 2 to level 1 between 2007 and 2016. One was excluded due to missing data. After transition, patient characteristics showed differences in the distribution of race, comorbidities, insurance status, injury severity scores, injury mechanisms, and injury type. After propensity score matching, patients treated in a trauma center after transition from level 2 to 1 required significantly fewer ICU admissions and had lower complication rates. However, significantly more unplanned intubations, unplanned returns to the OR, unplanned ICU transfers, ventilation use, surgical site infections, pneumonia, and urinary tract infections and higher mortality were reported after the transition. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma centers that transitioned from level 2 to level 1 had lower overall complications, with fewer patients requiring ICU admission. However, higher mortality and more surgical site infections, pneumonia, urinary tract infections, unplanned intubations, and unplanned ICU transfers were reported after the transition. These findings may have significant implications in the planning of trauma systems for administrators and healthcare leaders.

Distal femur fractures have a higher mortality rate compared to hip fractures among the elderly: Insights from the National Trauma Data Bank.

INTRODUCTION: The comparison of mortality and morbidity between distal femur (DF) and hip fracture in the old age is rarely reported in the literature. We aim to analyze a nationwide database among the elderly to compare the outcomes between hip fractures and distal femur fractures in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank was queried between 2007-2014 to identify distal femur (DF) and hip fracture patients greater than 65 years of age. Outcomes analyzed included in-hospital mortality, total hospital length of stay(LOS), intensive care unit length of stay(ICU-LOS), length of ventilation use and hospital discharge disposition. Multivariable regression models were performed to adjust for potential confounders. Statistical significance was established at p < 0.001. RESULTS: 26,325 (10.1%) and 233,213 (89.9%) patients reported a diagnosis of DF and hip fracture, respectively. The inpatient mortality rate was significantly higher in the distal femur fracture group (8.3% vs. 6.7%), with significantly longer LOS (7.87 vs. 6.65), ICU-LOS (1.50 vs. 0.73), and required ventilation days (0.74 vs. 0.27). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that hip fracture patients had a lower mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI [0.76, -0.85]; p < 0.001), shorter LOS ([aOR], -0.31; 95% CI [-0.39, -0.23]; P < 0.001), and more likely to be discharged home ([aOR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.85, 0.91; P < 0.001, compared to DF fracture patients. CONCLUSION: After adjusting for potential factors, DF fracture patients have a significantly higher mortality, longer LOS, and less likely to be discharged home compared to hip fractures among the elderly. These results may suggest clinicians and caregivers for closely monitoring of clinical conditions for these patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.