Pelvic packing or endovascular interventions: Which should be given priority in managing hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures? A systematic review and a meta-analysis.

Background: Pelvic fractures in trauma patients can be associated with substantial massive hemorrhage. Hemostasis interventions mainly consist of pelvic packing (PP) and endovascular intervention (EI), such as angiography-embolization (AE) and resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA). Whether PP or EI should be prioritized for the management of hemodynamic unstable patients with pelvic fractures remains under debate. This meta-analysis aimed to establish the evidence-based recommendations for the management of hemodynamic unstable patients. Materials and methods: PubMed, CENTRAL, and EMBASE databases were searched for articles published from January 1, 2000 to January 31, 2023. Eligible studies, such as retrospective cohort studies, propensity score matching studies, prospective cohort studies, observational cohort studies, quasi-randomized clinical trials evaluating PP and EI (AE or REBOA) for the management of patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures, were included. Mean Difference (MD), relative risk (RR), and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using fixed- or random-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of included trials. We compared the effectiveness of the two methods in terms of mortality, unstable fracture pattens, injury severity score (ISS), systolic blood pressure (SBP), lactate (LA), base deficiency (BE), hemoglobin preoperatively, blood transfusion requirement, the time to and of operation, complications. Results: Overall, 15 trials enrolling 1136 patients were analyzed, showing a total mortality rate of 28.4 % (323/1136). No effect of PP preference on the ISS (PP 36.4 ± 10.4 vs. EI 34.5 ± 12.7), SBP (PP 81.1 ± 24.3 mmHg vs. EI 94.2 ± 32.4 mmHg), LA (PP 4.66 ± 2.72 mmol/L vs. 4.85 ± 3.45 mmol/L), BE (PP 8.14 ± 5.64 mmol/L vs. 6.66 ± 5.68 mmol/L), and unstable fracture patterns (RR = 1.10, 95 % CI [0.63, 1.92]) was observed. PP application was associated with lower preoperative hemoglobin level (PP 8.11 ± 2.28 g/dL vs. EI 8.43 ± 2.43 g/dL, p < 0.05), more preoperative transfusion (MD = 2.53, 95 % CI [0.01, 5.06]), less postoperative transfusion within the first 24 h (MD = -1.09, 95 % CI [-1.96, -0.22]), shorter waiting time to intervention (MD = -0.93, 95 % CI [-1.54, -0.31]), and shorter operation time of intervention (MD = -0.41, 95 % CI [-0.52, -0.30]). PP had lower mortality rate owing to uncontrolled hemorrhage in the acute phase (RR = 0.41, 95 % CI [0.22, 0.79]). There was neither difference in mortality due to other complications (RR = 1.60, 95 % CI [0.79, 3.24]), nor in total mortality (RR = 0.92, 95%CI [0.49, 1.74]) (p > 0.05). Conclusions: PP showed advantages of reducing the amount of postoperative transfusion, shortening the time of waiting and operating, and decreasing mortality due to uncontrolled hemorrhage in the acute phase without raising the odds of mortality due to complications. PP, a reliable hemostatic method, should be prioritized for resuscitating most pelvic fractures with hemodynamically unstable, especially in case of bleeding from veins and fracture sites, as well as inadequate EI.

Factors Associated With Pelvic Infection After Pre-Peritoneal Pelvic Packing for Hemodynamically Unstable Pelvic Fractures.

Background: Preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) and external fixation has led to improved mortality after devastating pelvic trauma. However, there is limited literature on infection after this intervention. We aim to study the risk factors associated with pelvic infection after PPP. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of patients who underwent PPP at a single level 1 trauma center was performed. Results: Over the 18-year study period, 222 patients were identified. Twenty-three percent of patients had an open fracture. Pelvic angiography was performed in 24% of patients with 16% requiring angioembolization (AE). The average time to packing removal was two (one to two days) days, although 10% of patients had their pelvis re-packed. Overall infection rate was 14% (n = 31); if pelvic re-packing was performed, the infection rate increased to 45%. Twenty-two of the patients with an infection required additional procedures for their infection, and ultimately hardware removal occurred in eight patients. On univariable analysis, patients with pelvic infections had more open fractures (55% vs. 17%; p < 0.01), underwent AE more frequently (29% vs. 14%; p = 0.04), were more likely to undergo repacking (32% vs. 6%; p < 0.01), and had packing in place for longer (2 [1,2] vs. 2 [2,3]; p = 0.01). On logistic multivariable regression analysis, open fracture (odds ratio [OR], 5.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-14.1) and pelvic re-packing (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.2-18.5) were independent risk factors for pelvic infection. Conclusions: Pelvic infection after PPP is a serious complication independently associated with open fracture and re-packing of the pelvis. Re-intervention was required in most patients with infection.

Management of Pelvic Trauma.

Pelvic fractures are common after blunt trauma with patients' presentation ranging from stable with insignificant fractures to life-threatening exsanguination from unstable fractures. Often, hemorrhagic shock from a pelvic fracture may go unrecognized and high clinical suspicion for a pelvic source lies with the clinician. A multidisciplinary coordinated effort is required for management of these complex patients. In the exsanguinating patient, hemorrhage control remains the top priority and may be achieved with external stabilization, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta, preperitoneal pelvic packing, angiographic intervention, or a combination of therapies. These modalities have been shown to reduce mortality in this challenging population.

Arterial angioembolisation versus pre-peritoneal pelvic packing in haemodynamically unstable patients with complex pelvic fractures: a meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Angioembolisation (AE) and/or pre-peritoneal pelvic packing (PPP) may be necessary for patients with complex pelvic fractures who are haemodynamically unstable. However, it remains unclear whether AE or PPP should be performed as an initial intervention and ongoing debates exist. This meta-analysis aimed to compare AE versus PPP in haemodynamically unstable patients with acute pelvic fractures. The primary outcomes of interest were to compare in-hospital mortality rate and number of blood units transfused. Secondary outcomes included evaluating differences in the time from diagnosis to treatment, as well as the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital. METHODS: All clinically relevant studies comparing AE versus PPP in patients with complex pelvic fractures and haemodynamic instability were accessed. The 2020 PRISMA guidelines were followed. In September 2023, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Embase, without constraint. RESULTS: Data from 320 patients were collected (AE: 174; PPP: 146). The mean age on admission was 47.4 ± 7.2 years. The mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) on admission was 43.5 + 5.4 points. Baseline comparability was observed in ISS (P = 0.5, Table 3) and mean age (P = 0.7, Table 3). No difference was reported in mortality rate (P = 0.2) or rate of blood units transfused (P = 0.3). AE had a longer mean time to the procedure of 44.6 min compared to PPP (P = 0.04). The mean length of ICU and hospital stay were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Despite the longer mean time from admission to the procedure, no significant differences were found between AE and PPP in terms of in-hospital mortality, blood units transfused, or length of ICU, and hospital stay. These findings should be interpreted considering the limitations of the present study. High-quality comparative research is strongly warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, meta-analysis.

Extraperitoneal pelvic packing versus angiographic embolization for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures: a retrospective single-center analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively analyze the clinical data and treatment procedures of angiographic embolization (AE) and extraperitoneal pelvic packing (EPP) for traumatic pelvic fractures in our center for the purpose of providing recommendations on the selection of treatment protocols. METHODS: We analyzed 110 patients with traumatic pelvic fractures treated with AE and EPP from January 2015 to May 2023. The patients were divided into the AE group (69 men, 41 women) and the EPP group (20 men, 12 women). The primary outcomes were the mortality rate and incidence of complications. RESULTS: The mortality rate was slightly lower in the AE than EPP group (7.3% vs. 9.4%). The overall blood transfusion volume was lower and the length of hospital stay was shorter in the AE than EPP group (7.79 ± 12.04 vs. 9.14 ± 14.21 units and 20.48 ± 11.32 vs. 22.14 ± 10.47 days). CONCLUSIONS: Both AE and EPP have good treatment effects. AE is preferred for patients in stable condition with severe hemorrhage. This study suggests that EPP should be the primary treatment and that AE should serve as a complementary treatment for critical patients.

Management strategy for open pelvic fractures: A 11-year single-centre, retrospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Open pelvic fractures are commonly associated with life-threatening, uncontrollable haemorrhages. Although management methods for pelvic injury-associated haemorrhage have been established, the early mortality rate associated with open pelvic fractures remains high. This study aimed to identify predictors of mortality and effective treatment methods for open pelvic fractures. METHODS: We defined open pelvic fractures as pelvic fractures with an open wound directly connected to the adjacent soft tissue, genitals, perineum, or anorectal structures, resulting in soft tissue injuries. This study was performed on trauma patients (age ≥15 years) injured by a blunt mechanism between 2011 and 2021 at a single trauma centre. We collected and analysed the data on the Injury Severity Score (ISS), the Revised Trauma Score (RTS), the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay, transfusion, preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP), resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA), therapeutic angio-embolisation, laparotomy, faecal diversion, and mortality. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients with blunt open pelvic fractures were included. The median age was 45 years (interquartile range, 27-57 years) and median ISS was 34 (24-43). The most frequently performed treatment methods were laparotomy (53%) and pelvic binder (53%), followed by faecal diversion (40%) and PPP (38%). PPP was the only method performed at a higher rate in the survival group for haemorrhagic control (41% vs. 30%). Haemorrhagic mortality was present in one case that received PPP. The overall mortality was 21%. In the univariate logistic regression analysis, initial systolic blood pressure (SBP), TRISS, RTS, packed red blood cell transfusion for the first 24 h, and base excess showed statistical significance (p<0.05). In the multivariate logistic regression model, initial SBP was identified as an independent risk factor for mortality (odds ratio, 0.943; 95% confidence interval, 0.907-0.980; p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: A low initial SPB may be an independent predictor of mortality in patients with open pelvic fractures. Our findings suggest that PPP might be a feasible method to decrease haemorrhagic mortality from open pelvic fractures, especially for haemodynamically unstable patients with low initial SBP. Further studies are required to validate these clinical findings.

Effectiveness and safety of bilateral internal iliac artery ligation with pre-peritoneal pelvic packing for life-threatening pelvic trauma.

This study analyzed the outcomes of bilateral internal iliac artery (IIA) ligation with preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) in hemodynamically unstable patients with major pelvic fractures. All-cause mortality was examined, periprocedural safety for critical circumstances was reviewed, and iliac artery ligation-related complications of the postoperative phase were evaluated. A total of 20 patients who suffered substantially from severe pelvic trauma with hemodynamic instability and subsequently underwent bilateral IIA ligation with PPP between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2021, were enrolled in the study. The median participant age was 60.5 years, and 65.0% were male. The median systolic blood pressure was 68.5 mmHg on arrival. Increased lactate level (median, 11.05 mmol/L) suggested that the patients were in shock distinctly due to hypovolemia. It took approximately 1 h to complete the ligation of bilateral IIA to accomplish hemostasis (median, 65.5 min). The iliac vein was injured during dissection in three cases. During the ICU stay (median, 17.5 days), acute kidney injury was identified in 13 patients, likely due to volume depletion. The median ventilator-free days was 13.5; six patients were confirmed with ventilator-associated pneumonia. Moreover, 12 patients were diagnosed with acute respiratory distress syndrome. There was one case in which the lower extremity artery was acutely occluded. Anatomic hemostasis was achieved in 18 patients. The two patients for which anatomic hemostasis failed became two mortality cases from preperitoneal hemorrhage. Our analysis showed that bilateral IIA ligation with PPP was effective as a lifesaving procedure in hemodynamically unstable patients with a major pelvic fracture in terms of mortality due to fracture-related exsanguination. Moreover, the incidence of periprocedural complications was considered tolerable, making the procedure worth a try, especially in austere and underdeveloped healthcare settings.

Pelvic packing in the treatment of severe postpartum posthysterectomiam hemorrhage.

INTRODUCTION: Pelvic packing (PP) as a simple method of "damage control surgery" in severe abdominopelvic hemorrhage in gynecological and obstetric surgery after emergency obstetrics or gynecological hysterectomy. OBJECTIVE: To present the case of successful PP as a simple and effective method in refractory pelvic bleeding after emergent peripartum hysterectomy and severe obstetric shock with consumptive coagulopathy. CASE REPORT: Acording to laboratory findings and clinical condition in a 30-year-old (G2 P2) parturient, it was most likely an obstetric embolism with uterine rupture as the cause of severe postparum hemorrhage with disseminated intravascular coagulopathy and obstetrics hemorrhagic shock development in the described case. Pelvic packing after postpartum hysterectomy was the definitive minimally invasive and simple hemostatic procedure. CONCLUSION: The use of pelvic packing and obstetrics skills should be included in the protocol as a necessary, life-saving, and uncomplicated vital indication procedure.

Inflate and pack! Pelvic packing combined with REBOA deployment prevents hemorrhage related deaths in unstable pelvic fractures.

INTRODUCTION: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is advocated for hemorrhage control in pelvic fracture patients in shock. We evaluated REBOA in patients undergoing preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) for pelvic fracture-related hemorrhage. METHODS: Retrospective, single-institution study of unstable pelvic fractures (hemodynamic instability despite 2 units of red blood cells (RBCs) and fracture identified on x-ray). Management included the placement of a Zone III REBOA in the emergency department (ED) for systolic blood pressure <80 mmHg. All PPP patients were included and analyzed for injury characteristics, transfusion requirements, outcomes and complications. Additionally, patients who received REBOA (REBOA+) were compared to those that did not (REBOA-). RESULTS: During the study period (January 2015 - January 2019), 652 pelvic fracture patients were admitted; 78 consecutive patients underwent PPP. Median RBCs at PPP completion compared to 24 h post-packing were 11 versus 3 units (p<0.05). Median time to operation was 45 min. After PPP, 7 (9%) patients underwent angioembolization. Mortality was 14%. No mortalities were due to ongoing pelvic fracture hemorrhage or physiologic exhaustion; all were a withdrawal of life sustaining support, most commonly due to neurologic insults (TBI/fat emboli = 6, stroke/spinal cord injury = 3). REBOA+ patients (n = 31) had a significantly higher injury severity score (45 vs 38, p<0.01) and higher heart rate (130 vs 118 beats per minute, p = 0.04) than REBOA-. The systolic blood pressure, base deficit, and number of RBCs transfused in the ED, and time spent in the ED were similar between groups. REBOA+ had a higher median transfusion of RBCs at PPP completion (11 units vs 5 units, p<0.01) but similar RBC transfusion in the 24 h after PPP (2 vs 1 units, p = 0.27). Mortality, pelvic infection, and ICU length of stay was not different between these cohorts. CONCLUSION: PPP with REBOA was utilized in more severely injured patients with greater physiologic derangements. Although REBOA patients required greater transfusion requirements, there were no deaths due to acute pelvic hemorrhage. This suggests the combination of REBOA with PPP provides life-saving hemorrhage control in otherwise devastating injuries.

Preperitoneal Pelvic Packing is Associated With Increased Risk of Venous Thromboembolism.

INTRODUCTION: Preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) is an important intervention for control of severe pelvic hemorrhage in blunt trauma patients. We hypothesized that PPP is associated with an increased incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of blunt trauma patients with severe pelvic fractures (AIS ≥4) using the 2015-2017 American College of Surgeons-Trauma Quality Improvement Program database was performed. Patients who underwent PPP within four hours of admission were matched to patients who did not using propensity score matching. Matching was performed based on demographics, comorbidities, injury- and resuscitation-related parameters, vital signs at presentation, and initiation and type of prophylactic anticoagulation. The rates of DVT and PE were compared between the matched groups. RESULTS: Out of 5129 patients with severe pelvic fractures, 157 (3.1%) underwent PPP within four h of presentation and were matched with 157 who did not. No significant differences were detected between the two matched groups in any of the examined baseline variables. Similarly, mortality and end-organ failure rates were not different. However, PPP patients were significantly more likely to develop DVT (12.7% versus 5.1%, P = 0.028) and PE (5.7% versus 0.0%, P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: PPP in severe pelvic fractures secondary to blunt trauma is associated with an increased risk of DVT and PE. A high index of suspicion and a low threshold for screening for these conditions should be maintained in patients who undergo PPP.

Effective hemostasis by preperitoneal pelvic packing for common iliac vein injury without pelvic fracture in severe blunt trauma: a case report.

Background: A common iliac vein injury in the absence of pelvic fractures due to blunt trauma is rare, with no treatment strategy established. Case Presentation: A 48-year-old man, who was injured in a dumbwaiter accident, presented to the hospital with hemorrhagic shock. Computed tomography (CT) revealed active bleeding from the intercostal and hepatic arteries as well as the left common iliac vein. No pelvic fracture was noted. Preperitoneal pelvic packing was performed for the left common iliac vein injury as a damage control surgery. After the operation, endovascular embolization was performed to address the arterial bleeding. The patient became hemodynamically stable, and follow-up CT showed no signs of bleeding. The packing gauze was removed 3 days after the admission. The patient was discharged without complications. Conclusion: Preperitoneal pelvic packing provided temporary hemostasis in a hemodynamically unstable patient with common iliac vein injury but with no pelvic fractures.

Role of pelvic packing in the first attention given to hemodynamically unstable pelvic fracture patients: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of pelvic packing (PP) in pelvic fracture patients with hemodynamic instability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three databases-PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library-were systematically searched to identify studies presenting comparisons between a protocol including PP and a protocol without PP. Mortality, transfusion requirement and length of hospitalization were extracted and pooled for meta-analysis. Relative risk (RR) and standard mean difference (SMD), along with their confidence intervals (CIs), were used as the pooled statistical indices. RESULTS: Eight studies involving 480 patients were identified as being eligible for meta-analysis. PP usage was associated with significantly reduced overall mortality (RR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.47-0.79, p < 0.01) as well as reduced mortality within 24 h after admission (RR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.26-0.69, p < 0.01) and due to hemorrhage (RR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.14-0.50, p < 0.01). The usage of PP also decreased the need for pre-operative transfusion (SMD = - 0.44, 95% CI = - 0.69 to - 0.18, p < 0.01), but had no influence on total transfusion during the first 24 h after admission (SMD = 0.05, 95% CI = - 0.43-0.54, p = 0.83) and length of hospitalization (ICU stay and total stay). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicates that a treatment protocol including PP could reduce mortality and transfusion requirement before intervention in pelvic fracture patients with hemodynamic instability vs. angiography and embolization. This latter technique could be used as a feasible and complementary technique afterwards.

[Place of preperitoneal pelvic packing in severe pelvic traumatisms: 20 cases in a French level 1 trauma center]. / Place du packing pré-péritonéal pelvien dans les traumatismes graves du bassin : étude à partir de 20 cas réalisés dans un trauma center de niveau 1 français.

BACKGROUND: The overall mortality of hemodynamically unstable patients with pelvic trauma is high. Their management is controversial concerning places of arterioembolization and pelvic packing associated with pelvic stabilization. The aim of this study was to collect the pre-peritoneal pelvic packing (PPP) performed in our institution over 10years in order to propose a management algorithm. METHOD: From January 2010 to December 2020, all patients with a hemodynamically unstable pelvic fracture who had PPP combined with pelvic stabilization were included. Data were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. The main judgement criteria were early hemorrhage-induced mortality (<24h) and overall mortality (<30d). RESULTS: Twenty patients had PPP out of 287 polytrauma patients with pelvic fracture. The first-line PPP proposed in our algorithm significantly reduced the number of red blood cells (RBCs) (P=0.0231) and improved systolic blood pressure (SBP) (P<0.001) within 24hours of first-line PPP (compared with preoperative). Six patients (30%) were embolized postoperatively for active bleeding not necessarily pelvic. The overall mortality at 30days was 50% (10/20). CONCLUSION: PPP is a fast, easy, effective and safe procedure for venous, bone and sometimes arterial bleeding. PPP is part of damage control surgery and we propose it as a first-line procedure. AE remains complementary in a second step.

Impact of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in traumatic abdominal and pelvic exsanguination: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) represents a minimally invasive technique of aortic occlusion (AO). It has been demonstrated to be safe and effective with appropriate training in traumatic hemorrhage with hemodynamic instability; however, its indications are still debated. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the impact of REBOA on mortality in torso trauma patient with severe non-compressible hemorrhage compared to other temporizing hemostatic techniques. STUDY DESIGN: The primary outcome is represented by 24-h, and in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes are post-procedural hemodynamic improvement (systolic blood pressure-SBP), mean injury severity score (ISS) differences, treatment-related morbidity, transfusional requirements and identification of prognostic factors. RESULTS: A significant survival benefit at 24 h (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.27-0.79; I2: 55%; p = 0.005) was highlighted in patients undergoing REBOA. Regarding in-hospital mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.75-1.32; I2: 73%; p = 0.98) no differences in risk of death were noticed. A hemodynamic improvement-although not significant-was highlighted, with 55.8 mmHg post-AO SBP mean difference between REBOA and control groups. A significantly lower mean number of packed Red Blood Cells (pRBCs) was noticed for REBOA patients (mean difference: - 3.02; 95% CI - 5.79 to - 0.25; p = 0.033). Nevertheless, an increased risk of post-procedural complications (RR 1.66; 95% CI 0.39-7.14; p = 0.496) was noticed in the REBOA group. CONCLUSIONS: REBOA may represent a valid tool in the initial treatment of multiple sites subdiaphragmatic hemorrhage with refractory hemodynamic instability. However, due to several important limitations of the present study, our findings should be interpreted with caution. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III according to ELIS (SR/MA with up to two negative criteria).

The effect of preperitoneal pelvic packing for hemodynamically unstable patients with pelvic fractures.

PURPOSE: Hemodynamically unstable patients with pelvic fractures still represent a challenge to trauma surgeons and have a very high mortality. This study was designed to explore the effect of the interventions of direct preperitoneal pelvic packing for the hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures. METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 67 cases of severe pelvic fractures with unstable hemodynamics from October 2011 to December 2019. All patients presented in our emergency center and received preperitoneal pelvic packing were included in this study. The indication was persistent systolic blood pressure ≤90 mmHg during initial resuscitation and after transfusion of two units of red blood cells. Patients with hemodynamic stability who need no preperitoneal pelvic packing to control bleeding were excluded. Their demographic characteristics, clinical features, laboratory results, therapeutic interventions, adverse events, and prognostic outcomes were collected from digital information system of electronic medical records. Statistics were described as mean ± standard deviation or medium and analyzed using pair sample t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: The patients' average age was 41.6 years, ranging from 10 to 88 years. Among them, 45 cases were male (67.2%) and 22 cases were female (32.8%). Significant difference was found regarding the systolic blood pressure (mmHg) in the emergency department (78.4 ± 13.9) and after preperitoneal pelvic packing in the surgery intensive care unit (100.1 ± 17.6) (p < 0.05). Simultaneously, the arterial base deficit (mmol/L) were significantly lower in the surgery intensive care unit (median -6, interquartile range -8 to -2) than in the emergency department (median -10, interquartile range -14 to -8) (p < 0.05). After preperitoneal pelvic packing, 15 patients (22.4%) underwent pelvic angiography for persistent hypotension or suspected ongoing haemorrhage. The overall mortality rate was 29.5% (20 of 67). CONCLUSIONS: Preperitoneal pelvic packing, as a useful surgical technique, is less invasive and can be very efficient in early intra-pelvic bleed control.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in pelvic ring fractures: The Denver Health protocol.

Patients presenting with hemodynamic instability associated with pelvic fractures continue to have very high mortality and surgeons continue to seek damage control strategies that may improve survival. Strategies usually require massive transfusion, immediate pelvic stabilization and another adjunctive maneuver's such as angioembolization or preperitoneal pelvic packing to prevent hemorrhagic death. One current intervention that has regained some popularity in lieu of resuscitative thoracotomy is the Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA). This requires some manner of femoral arterial access to insert a balloon into the aorta and increase central blood pressure (cardiac and cerebral perfusion) and control active pelvic bleeding. Based on several animal models and an increasing number of publications, many US level I trauma centers have now opted to use REBOA in carefully selected patients showing signs of near cardiac arrest from non-compressible torso hemorrhage. Description of the current advances in aortic occlusion using catheter-based technology in the setting of severe shock for non-compressible torso hemorrhage from pelvic ring fracture is the purpose of this report.

Infectious complications of extra-peritoneal pelvic packing in emergency room.

PURPOSE: The Extra-Peritoneal Pelvic Packing (EPP) is a procedure used in emergency conditions to control pelvic hemorrhage. This procedure can be performed in Emergency Room (ER) if the patient is too unstable to be transported into the operating room (OR), with a possible increased risk of infections linked to a less sterile environment. METHODS: All patients who underwent EPP from 2009 to 2018 were selected from the trauma registry. The patients were divided into two groups according to where EPP was performed (ER or OR). A Propensity Score Matching was realized. EPP was removed in all patients in the OR after obtaining hemodynamic stabilization within 24-48 h and surgical pads were sent to the laboratory for microbiological analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients underwent EPP during the period of the study. After PSM, 26 couples of patients were selected. No differences were observed between the two groups in the development of pelvic infection. Patients managed in OR showed a higher rate of associated abdominal injuries (p = 0.027) and an increasing need for external fixation (p = 0,005) as well as an increased proportion of laparotomies (p = 0.023), orthopedic interventions (p = 0.005) and a higher systolic blood pressure on admission (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The EPP is a safe procedure, even when performed out of OR. The EPP in ER allows an earlier control of bleeding in patients in extremis. To minimize the risk of infection, EPP should be removed early, as soon as hemodynamics have been stabilized.

Pelvic packing and angio-embolization after blunt pelvic trauma: a retrospective 18-year analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of pelvic trauma related hemorrhage is challenging and remains controversial. In hemodynamically unstable patients suspected for massive bleeding, pre-peritoneal packing (PPP) with temporary external fixation (EF) and subsequent trans-arterial embolization (TAE) can be performed in order to control bleeding. In hemodynamically stable patients suspected for minor to moderate bleeding, primary TAE with EF may be performed. The goal of this study was to determine effectiveness and safety of both strategies. METHODS: Retrospectively, patients that received treatment for pelvic trauma-related hemorrhage at two level 1 trauma centers located in the United States between January 2001 and January 2019 were evaluated. Both centers advocate subsequent TAE in addition to PPP and EF in hemodynamically unstable patients, and primary TAE in stable patients. Demographic and clinical data was collected and mortality, ischemic and infectious complications were determined. RESULTS: In total, 135 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 61 hemodynamically unstable patients suspected for massive pelvic bleeding underwent primary PPP (45%) and 74 stable patients suspected for minor/moderate bleeding underwent primary TAE (55%). In total, 37/61 primary PPP patients underwent EF (61%) and 48 underwent adjunct TAE (79%), performed bilaterally in 77% and unselective by use of gelfoam in 72% of cases. Primary TAE patients received embolization bilaterally in 49% and unselective in 35% of cases. Exsanguination-related deaths were found in 7/61 primary PPP patients (11%). There were none among the primary TAE patients. Potentially ischemic in-hospital complications, of which one could be considered severe (gluteal necrosis), occurred more in patients that received bilateral unselective TAE compared to all other TAE patients (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Primary TAE appears to be an effective and safe adjunct for (minor) pelvic hemorrhage in hemodynamically stable patients. Primary PPP followed by EF and adjunct bilateral unselective TAE with gelfoam appears effective for those suspected of massive pelvic bleeding. This unselective embolization approach using gelfoam might be related to (ischemic) complications. When considering the amount and severity of complications and the severity of pelvic trauma, these might not outweigh the benefit of fast hemorrhage control.

Prospective validation of a new protocol with preperitoneal pelvic packing as the mainstay for the treatment of hemodynamically unstable pelvic trauma: a 5-year experience.

PURPOSES: Hemodynamically unstable pelvic trauma has been a significant challenge even in most experienced Trauma Centres. In 2011 preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) was introduced in our Hospital as the first manoeuvre. This study aims to review overall mortality at 24 h from arrival in the emergency department. METHODS: A retrospective review of our prospective database was performed considering patients with systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 90 mmHg or with the need for more than 2 Units of packed red blood cells (PRBC) on admission in the emergency department, (ED) and a pelvic fracture. Values were expressed as a median and interquartile range. Continuous variables were compared with the Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS: Between September 2011 and December 2016, we treated 30 patients. Median age was 51 years (40-65) and Injury Severity Score 36 (34-42). SBP in the ED was 90 (67-99), heart rate was 115 (90-130), Base Excess - 8 (- 11.5/- 4.8), pH 7.23 (7.20-7.28). Median PRBC requirements during the first 24 h (from admission) were 13 Units (8-18.8). Time to emergency treatment was 63 min (51-113). 17 patients (56.6%) underwent angiography after PPP. Overall 24 h mortality was 30%. A comparison between survivors and non-survivors showed no statistically significant differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, PPP resulted to be quick to perform and effective. No death occurred from direct pelvic bleeding.

The past, present, and future management of hemodynamic instability in patients with unstable pelvic ring injuries.

Pelvic ring injuries presenting in hemorrhagic shock have historically had a mortality rate greater than 30%. To address this high mortality rate our institution has had a multi-disciplinary protocol for hemodynamically unstable pelvic ring injuries since 1993. In 2004, this protocol was revised to prioritize pre-peritoneal pelvic packing over angiography to rapidly control hemorrhage, reduce high-volume blood transfusions, and decrease the number of deaths from acute blood loss. This protocol has been successful in reducing deaths from hemorrhage by 30%. Despite the benefits of such a protocol, many trauma centers are not routinely stabilizing pelvic ring injuries or controlling pelvic hemorrhage. Subsequently, mortality rates remain high with a significant proportion of patients dying from acute blood loss. Trauma centers adhering to multi-disciplinary protocols that allow for rapid stabilization of the pelvis and simultaneous control of multiple sites of hemorrhage in hybrid operative suites are promising future directions for the management of patients with these lethal injuries.