medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2010, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2010; 24 (3)

Infections in the surgical management of pelvic ring fractures

Chana RF, Villanueva MM, Ortiz EA, Calvo HJA, Pérez MR, Vaquero MJ

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 163-168
PDF size: 309.76 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Infections that occur after the surgical management of pelvic fractures may involve potentially devastating complications. The broader approaches involving soft tissue dissection and a long operative time may increase the infection rate when compared with more conservative approaches. This incidence may be reduced with a better understanding of the approaches, lymph node sparing and antibiotic use. The purpose of this study is to assess the incidence and severity of local infections in a series of adult patients with pelvic ring lesions treated surgically. Material and methods: This is a prospective observational descriptive study. A total of 49 patients operated-on by a single surgeon from 2004 to 2008 were included. Results: Forty-four patients (90%) had no signs of infection during the treatment period. In the remaining 5 cases (10%), 5 episodes of infection were documented. Conclusions: The identification of a local postoperative infection warrants an aggressive and urgent assessment of the patient. The devitalized tissue should be removed and empiric antibiotic therapy should be instituted after taking culture samples. A deep infection rate after pelvic fixation ranging from 0 to 10% has been published. The prevalence is higher among the surgical teams with less expertise. The incidence rate in our review was similar to the one reported in the literature.


REFERENCES

  1. Deakin DE, Boulton C, Moran CG: Mortality and causes of death among patients with isolated limb and pelvic fractures. Injury 2007; 38(3): 312-7.

  2. Kataoka Y, et al: Sepsis caused by peripelvic soft tissue infections in critically injured patients with multiple injuries and unstable pelvic fracture. J Trauma 2009; 66(6): 1548-54; discussion 1554-5.

  3. Letournel E: [Surgical treatment of fractures of the acetabulum: results over a twenty-five year period (author’s transl)]. Chirurgie 1981; 107(3): 229-36.

  4. Karmani S, et al: Infection of non-operatively managed acetabular fracture via a suprapubic catheter. Injury 2003; 34(7): 550-1.

  5. Mason WT, et al: Complications of temporary and definitive external fixation of pelvic ring injuries. Injury 2005; 36(5): 599-604.

  6. Gansslen A, Pohlemann T, Krettek C: [A simple supra acetabular external fixation for pelvic ring fractures]. Oper Orthop Traumatol 2005; 17(3): 296-312.

  7. Suzuki T, Smith WR, Moore EE: Pelvic packing or angiography: competitive or complementary? Injury 2009; 40(4): 343-53.

  8. Tseng S, Tornetta P: 3rd, Percutaneous management of Morel-Lavallee lesions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88(1): 92-6.

  9. Dente CJ, et al: The outcome of open pelvic fractures in the modern era. Am J Surg 2005; 190(6): 830-5.

  10. Lunsjo K, Abu-Zidan FM: Does colostomy prevent infection in open blunt pelvic fractures? A systematic review. J Trauma 2006; 60(5): 1145-8.

  11. Matta JM: Operative treatment of acetabular fractures through the ilioinguinal approach. A 10-year perspective. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1994; (305): 10-9.

  12. Letournel E: [Indications for surgical treatment of fractures of the acetabulum]. Chirurgie 1990; 116(4-5): 435-41.

  13. Tile M: Acute pelvic fractures: I. Causation and classification. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1996; 4(3): 143-51.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com