Pelvic Binders in Trauma Patients - Are We Doing it Right?

Introduction: Pelvic fractures from high-energy trauma require immediate stabilisation to avoid significant morbidity and mortality. When applied correctly over the level of the greater trochanters (GT) pelvic binders provide adequate stabilisation of unstable pelvic fractures. The aim of this study was to identify the accuracy of placement of pelvic binders in patients presenting to the local Major Trauma Centre (MTC). Methods: A retrospective study was carried out to assess the level of the pelvic binders in relation to the greater trochanters of the patient-classified as optimal or sub-optimal. Results: An initial review of the computed tomography (CT) trauma series in 28 consecutive patients with pelvic binders revealed that more than 50% of the pelvic binders were placed above the level of the GT, reducing the efficacy of the pelvic binders. A regional educational and training day was held with a focus on pelvic fracture management. Following this, a review was conducted on the placement of the pelvic binder in 100 consecutive patients. This confirmed a significant improvement in the position of the pelvic binder by over 70%. Conclusion: Inaccurately positioned pelvic binders provided suboptimal stabilisation of pelvic fractures. With education and awareness, there has been an improvement in the accuracy of pelvic binder placement in trauma patients. This study has highlighted the need for regular audit of current practice, in combination with regular education and training.

A descriptive survey on the use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) for pelvic fractures at US level I trauma centers

Background Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is not widely adopted for pelvic fracture management. Western Trauma Association recommends REBOA for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures, whereas Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma and Advanced Trauma Life Support do not. Method Utilizing a prospective cross-sectional survey, all 158 trauma medical directors at American College of Surgeons-verified Level I trauma centers were emailed survey invitations. The study aimed to determine the rate of REBOA use, REBOA indicators, and the treatment sequence of REBOA for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures. Results Of those invited, 25% (40/158) participated and 90% (36/40) completed the survey. Nearly half of trauma centers [42% (15/36)] use REBOA for pelvic fracture management. All participants included hemodynamic instability as an indicator for REBOA placement in pelvic fractures. In addition to hemodynamic instability, 29% (4/14) stated REBOA is used for patients who are ineligible for angioembolization, 14% (2/14) use REBOA when interventional radiology is unavailable, 7% (1/14) use REBOA for patients with a negative FAST. Fifty percent (7/14) responded that hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures exclusively indicates REBOA placement. Hemodynamic instability for pelvic fractures was most commonly defined as systolic blood pressure of < 90 [56% (20/36)]. At centers using REBOA, REBOA was the first line of treatment for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures 40% (6/15) of the time. Conclusions There is little consensus on REBOA use for pelvic fractures at US Level I Trauma Centers, except that hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures consistently indicated REBOA use.

Pelvic fracture: definitive management

♦ Pelvic fractures must be actively managed to avoid peri-operative complications♦ Understanding stability is the key to pelvic fracture management. Fixation is used to compensate for instability until healing occurs♦ Long term disability can occur despite optimum fixation.