Faculty Collaboration Database

A Statewide Assessment of Rib Fixation Patterns Reveals Missed Opportunities. J Surg Res 2019 Dec;244:205-211

Date

07/13/2019

Pubmed ID

31299437

DOI

10.1016/j.jss.2019.06.048

Scopus ID

2-s2.0-85068544124 (requires institutional sign-in at Scopus site)   7 Citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Rib fractures are a common consequence of traumatic injury and can result in significant debilitation. Rib fixation offers fracture stabilization, resulting in improved outcomes and decreased pulmonary complications, especially in high-risk groups such as those with flail segments. However, commercial rib fixation has only recently become clinically prevalent, and we hypothesize that significant variability exists in its utilization based on injury pattern and trauma center.

METHODS: The Pennsylvania Trauma System Foundation database was queried for all multiple rib fracture patients occurring statewide in 2016 and 2017. Demographics including the presence of flail and the occurrence of rib fixation was abstracted. Outcomes were compared between the fixation group and all other rib fracture patients. Deidentified treating trauma center was used to elicit center-level disparities.

RESULTS: During the study period, there were 12,910 patients with multiple rib fractures, of which 135 had flail segments. 57 patients underwent rib fixation, and 10 of which had a flail segment. Compared with the nonoperative cohort, those who underwent rib fixation were younger (52.5 versus 61.5, P = 0.0009), similar in gender (68% versus 62% male, P = 0.373), and race (80% versus 86% White, P = 0.239). The rib fixation group had higher Injury Severity Scores (19.4 versus 15.4 P = 0.0011). The timing of rib fixation was most frequent within 1 wk of injury but extended out through 3 wk; the occurrence of pulmonary complications had a similar distribution. The frequency of rib fixation rates within trauma centers was not associated with rib fracture patient volume, and 37.1% of multiple rib fracture patients were cared for at centers that did not perform rib fixation.

CONCLUSIONS: Rib fixation is infrequently used at trauma centers in Pennsylvania. It is used more frequently in nonflail injuries, and its use may be associated with the occurrence of pulmonary complications. Significant center-level variation exists in rib fixation rates among multiple fractured patients. A significant number of patients are cared for at centers that do not perform rib fixation. Further research is needed to illicit better-defined indications for operative fixation, and opportunities exist to further the penetrance of this practice to all trauma centers.

Author List

Mullens CL, Seamon MJ, Shiroff A, Cannon JW, Kaplan LJ, Pascual JL, Holena DN, Martin ND

Author

Daniel N. Holena MD Professor in the Surgery department at Medical College of Wisconsin

MESH terms used to index this publication - Major topics in bold

Adult
Aged
Female
Flail Chest
Fracture Fixation
Fractures, Multiple
Healthcare Disparities
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Pennsylvania
Practice Patterns, Physicians'
Prospective Studies
Registries
Retrospective Studies
Rib Fractures
Trauma Centers