与早期全面护理相比,损伤控制不能提供生存优势,而且增加了严重并发症的风险。

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Bruno C Coimbra, Junsik Kwon, Bishoy Zakhary, Babak Sarani, Matthew Firek, Timothy Allison-Aipa, Raul Coimbra
{"title":"与早期全面护理相比,损伤控制不能提供生存优势,而且增加了严重并发症的风险。","authors":"Bruno C Coimbra, Junsik Kwon, Bishoy Zakhary, Babak Sarani, Matthew Firek, Timothy Allison-Aipa, Raul Coimbra","doi":"10.1097/TA.0000000000004594","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Damage control orthopedics (DCO) was proposed to minimize the second hit of extensive surgical procedures in severely injured patients when treated with early fracture fixation (early total care [ETC]). The impact of DCO and ETC on the outcomes of severely injured patients sustaining femoral shaft fractures (FSFs) is unclear. We hypothesized that DCO is associated with lower mortality and decreased incidence of complications compared with ETC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Trauma Quality Improvement Project database was queried from 2007 to 2021. Adult patients 14 years or older with FSF and Injury Severity Score of >15 were included. Patients were divided into ETC and DCO groups and stratified according to fracture type: open or closed. The primary outcomes included acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), acute kidney injury (AKI), severe sepsis, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and mortality. Inverse probability treatment of weighting was used to balance the two cohorts of interest. A binomial logistic regression analysis was performed after inverse probability treatment of weighting to identify potential associations between the type of fixation procedure and the outcomes of interest.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 44,577 FSF patients were included. Mortality was 2.1%. No survival advantage was observed in the DCO group (odds ratio [OR], 0.92). However, significant associations between DCO and the risk of ARDS (OR, 1.64), AKI (OR, 1.57), severe sepsis (OR, 1.64), and DVT (OR, 1.64) were identified. Damage control orthopedics was not associated with decreased mortality after stratifying patients according to the fracture type and the type of operation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Damage control orthopedics is not associated with improved survival of severely injured patients with FSF. Damage control orthopedics is associated with an increased risk of ARDS, AKI, severe sepsis, and DVT compared with ETC. These findings persisted after analyzing the type of fracture. These results are significant for clinical practice, as more patients could be treated by ETC when compensated physiologically, independent of the fracture type.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":17453,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"907-914"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Damage control does not offer a survival advantage and increases the risk of serious complications compared with early total care in severely injured patients with femoral shaft fractures.\",\"authors\":\"Bruno C Coimbra, Junsik Kwon, Bishoy Zakhary, Babak Sarani, Matthew Firek, Timothy Allison-Aipa, Raul Coimbra\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/TA.0000000000004594\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Damage control orthopedics (DCO) was proposed to minimize the second hit of extensive surgical procedures in severely injured patients when treated with early fracture fixation (early total care [ETC]). The impact of DCO and ETC on the outcomes of severely injured patients sustaining femoral shaft fractures (FSFs) is unclear. We hypothesized that DCO is associated with lower mortality and decreased incidence of complications compared with ETC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Trauma Quality Improvement Project database was queried from 2007 to 2021. Adult patients 14 years or older with FSF and Injury Severity Score of >15 were included. Patients were divided into ETC and DCO groups and stratified according to fracture type: open or closed. The primary outcomes included acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), acute kidney injury (AKI), severe sepsis, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and mortality. Inverse probability treatment of weighting was used to balance the two cohorts of interest. A binomial logistic regression analysis was performed after inverse probability treatment of weighting to identify potential associations between the type of fixation procedure and the outcomes of interest.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 44,577 FSF patients were included. Mortality was 2.1%. No survival advantage was observed in the DCO group (odds ratio [OR], 0.92). However, significant associations between DCO and the risk of ARDS (OR, 1.64), AKI (OR, 1.57), severe sepsis (OR, 1.64), and DVT (OR, 1.64) were identified. Damage control orthopedics was not associated with decreased mortality after stratifying patients according to the fracture type and the type of operation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Damage control orthopedics is not associated with improved survival of severely injured patients with FSF. Damage control orthopedics is associated with an increased risk of ARDS, AKI, severe sepsis, and DVT compared with ETC. These findings persisted after analyzing the type of fracture. These results are significant for clinical practice, as more patients could be treated by ETC when compensated physiologically, independent of the fracture type.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17453,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"907-914\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004594\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004594","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:损伤控制矫形术(DCO)的提出是为了减少严重损伤患者在早期骨折固定治疗(早期全面护理[ETC])时广泛手术的第二次打击。DCO和ETC对严重损伤持续性股骨干骨折(fsf)患者预后的影响尚不清楚。我们假设与其他方法相比,DCO与更低的死亡率和更少的并发症发生率相关。方法:查询2007年至2021年创伤质量改善项目数据库。纳入14岁及以上的FSF、损伤严重程度评分为bbb15的成年患者。将患者分为ETC组和DCO组,并根据骨折类型:开放性或闭合性进行分层。主要结局包括急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)、急性肾损伤(AKI)、严重脓毒症、深静脉血栓形成(DVT)和死亡率。加权的逆概率处理被用来平衡两个感兴趣的队列。在加权逆概率处理后进行二项逻辑回归分析,以确定固定手术类型与感兴趣的结果之间的潜在关联。结果:共纳入44,577例FSF患者。死亡率为2.1%。DCO组未观察到生存优势(优势比[OR], 0.92)。然而,DCO与ARDS (OR, 1.64)、AKI (OR, 1.57)、严重脓毒症(OR, 1.64)和DVT (OR, 1.64)的风险之间存在显著关联。根据骨折类型和手术类型对患者进行分层后,损伤控制矫形术与降低死亡率无关。结论:损伤控制矫形术与改善严重损伤FSF患者的生存无关。与ETC相比,损伤控制矫形术与ARDS、AKI、严重败血症和DVT的风险增加有关。在分析骨折类型后,这些发现仍然存在。这些结果对临床实践具有重要意义,因为更多的患者可以在生理补偿的情况下接受ETC治疗,而与骨折类型无关。证据水平:治疗/护理管理;IV级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Damage control does not offer a survival advantage and increases the risk of serious complications compared with early total care in severely injured patients with femoral shaft fractures.

Background: Damage control orthopedics (DCO) was proposed to minimize the second hit of extensive surgical procedures in severely injured patients when treated with early fracture fixation (early total care [ETC]). The impact of DCO and ETC on the outcomes of severely injured patients sustaining femoral shaft fractures (FSFs) is unclear. We hypothesized that DCO is associated with lower mortality and decreased incidence of complications compared with ETC.

Methods: The Trauma Quality Improvement Project database was queried from 2007 to 2021. Adult patients 14 years or older with FSF and Injury Severity Score of >15 were included. Patients were divided into ETC and DCO groups and stratified according to fracture type: open or closed. The primary outcomes included acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), acute kidney injury (AKI), severe sepsis, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and mortality. Inverse probability treatment of weighting was used to balance the two cohorts of interest. A binomial logistic regression analysis was performed after inverse probability treatment of weighting to identify potential associations between the type of fixation procedure and the outcomes of interest.

Results: A total of 44,577 FSF patients were included. Mortality was 2.1%. No survival advantage was observed in the DCO group (odds ratio [OR], 0.92). However, significant associations between DCO and the risk of ARDS (OR, 1.64), AKI (OR, 1.57), severe sepsis (OR, 1.64), and DVT (OR, 1.64) were identified. Damage control orthopedics was not associated with decreased mortality after stratifying patients according to the fracture type and the type of operation.

Conclusion: Damage control orthopedics is not associated with improved survival of severely injured patients with FSF. Damage control orthopedics is associated with an increased risk of ARDS, AKI, severe sepsis, and DVT compared with ETC. These findings persisted after analyzing the type of fracture. These results are significant for clinical practice, as more patients could be treated by ETC when compensated physiologically, independent of the fracture type.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
11.80%
发文量
637
审稿时长
2.7 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery® is designed to provide the scientific basis to optimize care of the severely injured and critically ill surgical patient. Thus, the Journal has a high priority for basic and translation research to fulfill this objectives. Additionally, the Journal is enthusiastic to publish randomized prospective clinical studies to establish care predicated on a mechanistic foundation. Finally, the Journal is seeking systematic reviews, guidelines and algorithms that incorporate the best evidence available.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信