Purpose: Unstable pelvic ring injury can result in a life-threatening situation and lead to long-term disability. Established classification systems, recently emerged resuscitative and treatment options as well as techniques, have facilitated expansion in how these injuries can be studied and managed. This study aims to access practice variation in the management of unstable pelvic injuries around the globe. Methods: A standardized questionnaire including 15 questions was developed by experts from the SICOT trauma committee (Société Internationale de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie) and then distributed among members. The survey was conducted online for one month in 2022 with 358 trauma surgeons, encompassing responses from 80 countries (experience > 5 years = 79%). Topics in the questionnaire included surgical and interventional treatment strategies, classification, staging/reconstruction procedures, and preoperative imaging. Answer options for treatment strategies were ranked on a 4-point rating scale with following options: (1) always (A), (2) often (O), (3) seldom (S), and (4) never (N). Stratification was performed according to geographic regions (continents). Results: The Young and Burgess (52%) and Tile/AO (47%) classification systems were commonly used. Preoperative three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) scans were utilized by 93% of respondents. Rescue screws (RS), C-clamps (CC), angioembolization (AE), and pelvic packing (PP) were observed to be rarely implemented in practice (A + O: RS = 24%, CC = 25%, AE = 21%, PP = 25%). External fixation was the most common method temporized fixation (A + O = 71%). Percutaneous screw fixation was the most common definitive fixation technique (A + O = 57%). In contrast, 3D navigation techniques were rarely utilized (A + O = 15%). Most standards in treatment of unstable pelvic ring injuries are implemented equally across the globe. The greatest differences were observed in augmented techniques to bleeding control, such as angioembolization and REBOA, more commonly used in Europe (both), North America (both), and Oceania (only angioembolization). Conclusion: The Young-Burgess and Tile/AO classifications are used approximately equally across the world. Initial non-invasive stabilization with binders and temporary external fixation are commonly utilized, while specific haemorrhage control techniques such as pelvic packing and angioembolization are rarely and REBOA almost never considered. The substantial regional differences’ impact on outcomes needs to be further explored.

Early patient assessment is relevant for surgical decision making in severely injured patients and early definitive surgery is known to be beneficial in stable patients. The aim of this systematic review is to extract parameters indicative of risk factors for adverse outcome. Moreover, we aim to improve decision making and separate patients who would benefit from early versus staged definitive surgical fixation. Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of peer-reviewed articles in English or German language published between (2000 and 2022) was performed. The primary outcome was the pathophysiological response to polytrauma including coagulopathy, shock/haemorrhage, hypothermia and soft tissue injury (trauma, brain injury, thoracic and abdominal trauma, and musculoskeletal injury) to determine the treatment strategy associated with the least amount of complications. Articles that had used quantitative parameters to distinguish between stable and unstable patients were summarized. Two authors screened articles and discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Quantitative values for relevant parameters indicative of an unstable polytrauma patient were obtained. The initial systematic search using MeSH criteria yielded 1550 publications deemed relevant to the following topics (coagulopathy (n = 37), haemorrhage/shock (n = 7), hypothermia (n = 11), soft tissue injury (n = 24)). Thresholds for stable, borderline, unstable and in extremis conditions were defined according to the existing literature as follows: Coagulopathy; International Normalized Ratio (INR) and viscoelastic methods (VEM)/Blood/shock; lactate, systolic blood pressure and haemoglobin, hypothermia; thresholds in degrees Celsius/Soft tissue trauma: traumatic brain injury, thoracic and abdominal trauma and musculoskeletal trauma. In this systematic literature review, we summarize publications by focusing on different pathways that stimulate pathophysiological cascades and remote organ damage. We propose that these parameters can be used for clinical decision making within the concept of safe definitive surgery (SDS) in the treatment of severely injured patients.

Background: As electric bicycles (e-bikes) become increasingly popular, reports of injuries associated with e-bike usage are also rising. Patterns, characteristics, and severity of injuries following e-bike crashes need further investigation, particularly in contrast to injuries from conventional bicycle crashes. Methods: This prospective observational study included 82 patients treated at a Level II trauma center for injuries resulting from an electric or conventional bicycle crash. Data were collected over one year (05.09.2017–19.09.2018) during in- and outpatient visits. A study-specific case report form was used to identify the bicycle type, cycling behavior (e.g., use of a helmet, safety gear, alcohol), and circumstances of the crash (e.g., road conditions, speed, cause of the incident, time of day, season). Additional information about patient demographics, treatment, and injury characteristics, such as the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and body region injured, were documented. Results were analyzed using chi-square, Fisher’s exact, or Wilcoxon tests. Simple logistic or linear regression models were used to estimate associations. Results: Of the 82 patients, 56 (67%) were riding a conventional bike and 27 (33%) were using an e-bike. Most incidents were either single-bicycle crashes (66%) or automobile collisions (26%), with no notable difference in prevalence rates between groups. Although a higher proportion of conventional bikers were male (67% vs. 48%), the difference was not significant. E-bikers were older (median 60 years (IQR 44–70) vs. 45 years (IQR 32–62); p = 0.008), were hospitalized more often (48% vs. 24%, p = 0.025), and had worse ISS (median 3 (IQR 2–4) vs. 1 (IQR 1–3), p < 0.001), respectively. Body regions most affected were the extremities (78%) and external/skin (46%), and these were distributed similarly in both groups. Concomitant injury patterns of the thorax/chest with external/skin were higher among e-bikers (p < 0.001). When we controlled for the difference in the median age of the two groups, only the injury severity score of e-bikers remained significantly worse. Conclusions: Hospitalization and chest trauma rates were higher among e-bikers. After controlling for the older age of this group, the severity of their injuries remained worse than in conventional cyclists. Initial clinical assessments at trauma units should include an evaluation of the thorax/chest, particularly among elderly e-bikers. Level of evidence: Level III.

BACKGROUND: The timing of major fracture care in polytrauma patients has a relevant impact on outcomes. Yet, standardized treatment strategies with respect to concomitant injuries are rare. This study aims to provide expert recommendations regarding the timing of major fracture care in the presence of concomitant injuries to the brain, thorax, abdomen, spine/spinal cord, and vasculature, as well as multiple fractures. METHODS: This study used the Delphi method supported by a systematic review. The review was conducted in the Medline and EMBASE databases to identify relevant literature on the timing of fracture care for patients with the aforementioned injury patterns. Then, consensus statements were developed by 17 international multidisciplinary experts based on the available evidence. The statements underwent repeated adjustments in online- and in-person meetings and were finally voted on. An agreement of ≥75% was set as the threshold for consensus. The level of evidence of the identified publications was rated using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: A total of 12,476 publications were identified, and 73 were included. The majority of publications recommended early surgery (47/73). The threshold for early surgery was set within 24 hours in 45 publications. The expert panel developed 20 consensus statements and consensus >90% was achieved for all, with 15 reaching 100%. These statements define conditions and exceptions for early definitive fracture care in the presence of traumatic brain injury (n = 5), abdominal trauma (n = 4), thoracic trauma (n = 3), multiple extremity fractures (n = 3), spinal (cord) injuries (n = 3), and vascular injuries (n = 2). CONCLUSION: A total of 20 statements were developed on the timing of fracture fixation in patients with associated injuries. All statements agree that major fracture care should be initiated within 24 hours of admission and completed within that timeframe unless the clinical status or severe associated issues prevent the patient from going to the operating room. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis; Level IV.

Feasible and predictive scoring systems for severely injured geriatric patients are lacking. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a scoring system for the prediction of in-hospital mortality in severely injured geriatric trauma patients. The TraumaRegister DGU^® (TR-DGU) was utilized. European geriatric patients (≥65 years) admitted between 2008 and 2017 were included. Relevant patient variables were implemented in the GERtality score. By conducting a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, a comparison with the Geriatric Trauma Outcome Score (GTOS) and the Revised Injury Severity Classification II (RISC-II) Score was performed. A total of 58,055 geriatric trauma patients (mean age: 77 years) were included. Univariable analysis led to the following variables: age ≥ 80 years, need for packed red blood cells (PRBC) transfusion prior to intensive care unit (ICU), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥ 3, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ≤ 13, Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) in any body region ≥ 4. The maximum GERtality score was 5 points. A mortality rate of 72.4% was calculated in patients with the maximum GERtality score. Mortality rates of 65.1 and 47.5% were encountered in patients with GERtality scores of 4 and 3 points, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of the novel GERtality score was 0.803 (GTOS: 0.784; RISC-II: 0.879). The novel GERtality score is a simple and feasible score that enables an adequate prediction of the probability of mortality in polytraumatized geriatric patients by using only five specific parameters.