Multiple rib fractures: does flail chest matter?


Journal

Emergency medicine journal : EMJ
ISSN: 1472-0213
Titre abrégé: Emerg Med J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100963089

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jul 2021
Historique:
received: 02 12 2020
revised: 02 04 2021
accepted: 01 05 2021
pubmed: 15 5 2021
medline: 21 10 2021
entrez: 14 5 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Recent studies have reported significant morbidity and mortality in patients with multiple rib fractures, even without flail chest. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome and incidence of associated chest injuries between patients with and without flail chest, with three or more rib fractures. This study included patients with blunt trauma with at least three rib fractures, hospitalised during 2010-2019 in the Hillel Yaffe Medical Center in central Israel (level II trauma centre). Patients with and without radiologically defined flail chest were compared with regard to demographics, Injury Severity Score (ISS), GCS, systolic blood pressure (SBP) on admission, radiological evidence of flail chest, associated chest injuries, length of stay in intensive care unit, length of hospitalisation and mortality. The study included 407 patients, of which 79 (19.4%) had flail chest. Overall, pneumothorax and haemothorax were more common among patients with flail chest (p<0.05). When comparing patients with three to five rib fractures, there was no difference in length of intensive care and length of hospitalisation or mortality; however, there was a higher incidence of pneumothorax (24.6% vs 50.0%, p<0.05). When comparing patients with six or more rib fractures, no difference was found between patients with and without flail chest. In patients with three to five rib fractures, pneumothorax is more common among patients with flail chest. Clinical significance of flail chest in patients with more than six rib fractures is questionable and flail chest may not be a reliable marker for severity of chest injury in patients with more than six fractures.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Recent studies have reported significant morbidity and mortality in patients with multiple rib fractures, even without flail chest. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome and incidence of associated chest injuries between patients with and without flail chest, with three or more rib fractures.
METHODS METHODS
This study included patients with blunt trauma with at least three rib fractures, hospitalised during 2010-2019 in the Hillel Yaffe Medical Center in central Israel (level II trauma centre). Patients with and without radiologically defined flail chest were compared with regard to demographics, Injury Severity Score (ISS), GCS, systolic blood pressure (SBP) on admission, radiological evidence of flail chest, associated chest injuries, length of stay in intensive care unit, length of hospitalisation and mortality.
RESULTS RESULTS
The study included 407 patients, of which 79 (19.4%) had flail chest. Overall, pneumothorax and haemothorax were more common among patients with flail chest (p<0.05). When comparing patients with three to five rib fractures, there was no difference in length of intensive care and length of hospitalisation or mortality; however, there was a higher incidence of pneumothorax (24.6% vs 50.0%, p<0.05). When comparing patients with six or more rib fractures, no difference was found between patients with and without flail chest.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
In patients with three to five rib fractures, pneumothorax is more common among patients with flail chest. Clinical significance of flail chest in patients with more than six rib fractures is questionable and flail chest may not be a reliable marker for severity of chest injury in patients with more than six fractures.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33986019
pii: emermed-2020-210999
doi: 10.1136/emermed-2020-210999
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

496-500

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: None declared.

Auteurs

Yaakov Daskal (Y)

Surgical Division, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Israel kobidaskal@gmail.com.

Maya Paran (M)

Surgical Division, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Israel.

Alexander Korin (A)

Trauma Unit, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Israel.

Vladislav Soukhovolsky (V)

Forest Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences Siberian Branch, Novosibirsk, Russia.

Boris Kessel (B)

Surgical Division, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Israel.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH