Predictors of unplanned reoperation after operative treatment of pelvic ring injuries

George Ochenjele, Kristoff R. Reid, Renan Carlos Castillo, Carrie D. Schoonover, Ryan N. Montalvo, Theodore T. Manson, Marcus F. Sciadini, Jason W. Nascone, Anthony R Carlini, Robert V. O'Toole

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the incidence of unplanned reoperations after pelvic ring injuries and to develop a risk prediction model. Design: Retrospective review. Setting: Level I Trauma Center. Patients: The medical records of 913 patients (644 male and 269 female patients; mean age, 39 years; age range, 16-89 years) with unstable pelvic ring fractures operatively treated at our center from 2003 to 2015 were reviewed. Intervention: Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the relative contribution of associated clinical parameters to unplanned reoperations. A risk prediction model was developed to assess the effects of multiple covariates. Main Outcome Measurements: Unplanned reoperation for infection, fixation failure, heterotopic ossification, or bleeding complication. Results: Unplanned reoperations totaled 137 fractures, with an overall rate of 15% (8% infection, 6% fixation failure, <1% heterotopic ossification, and <1% bleeding complication). Reoperations for infection and fixation failure typically occurred within the first month after the index procedure. Four independent predictors of reoperation were open fractures, combined pelvic ring and acetabular injuries, abdominal visceral injuries, and increasing pelvic fracture grade. No independent association was shown between reoperation and patient, treatment, or other injury factors. Conclusions: Unplanned reoperations were relatively common. Infection and fixation failure were the most common indications for unplanned reoperations. Factors associated with reoperation are related to severity of pelvic and abdominal visceral injuries. Our findings suggest that these complications might be inherent and in many cases unavoidable despite appropriate current treatment strategies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)E245-E250
JournalJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Volume32
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2018

Fingerprint

Reoperation
Wounds and Injuries
Heterotopic Ossification
Therapeutics
Abdominal Injuries
Infection
Hemorrhage
Open Fractures
Trauma Centers
Medical Records
Logistic Models
Regression Analysis
Incidence

Keywords

  • abdominal visceral injury
  • disruption
  • fracture
  • operative treatment
  • pelvic ring injury
  • reoperation
  • risk prediction model

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Ochenjele, G., Reid, K. R., Castillo, R. C., Schoonover, C. D., Montalvo, R. N., Manson, T. T., ... O'Toole, R. V. (2018). Predictors of unplanned reoperation after operative treatment of pelvic ring injuries. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 32(7), E245-E250. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000001170

Predictors of unplanned reoperation after operative treatment of pelvic ring injuries. / Ochenjele, George; Reid, Kristoff R.; Castillo, Renan Carlos; Schoonover, Carrie D.; Montalvo, Ryan N.; Manson, Theodore T.; Sciadini, Marcus F.; Nascone, Jason W.; Carlini, Anthony R; O'Toole, Robert V.

In: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, Vol. 32, No. 7, 01.07.2018, p. E245-E250.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ochenjele, G, Reid, KR, Castillo, RC, Schoonover, CD, Montalvo, RN, Manson, TT, Sciadini, MF, Nascone, JW, Carlini, AR & O'Toole, RV 2018, 'Predictors of unplanned reoperation after operative treatment of pelvic ring injuries', Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, vol. 32, no. 7, pp. E245-E250. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000001170
Ochenjele, George ; Reid, Kristoff R. ; Castillo, Renan Carlos ; Schoonover, Carrie D. ; Montalvo, Ryan N. ; Manson, Theodore T. ; Sciadini, Marcus F. ; Nascone, Jason W. ; Carlini, Anthony R ; O'Toole, Robert V. / Predictors of unplanned reoperation after operative treatment of pelvic ring injuries. In: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2018 ; Vol. 32, No. 7. pp. E245-E250.
@article{e47ea24472f0409fbc95836101617d94,
title = "Predictors of unplanned reoperation after operative treatment of pelvic ring injuries",
abstract = "Objectives: To evaluate the incidence of unplanned reoperations after pelvic ring injuries and to develop a risk prediction model. Design: Retrospective review. Setting: Level I Trauma Center. Patients: The medical records of 913 patients (644 male and 269 female patients; mean age, 39 years; age range, 16-89 years) with unstable pelvic ring fractures operatively treated at our center from 2003 to 2015 were reviewed. Intervention: Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the relative contribution of associated clinical parameters to unplanned reoperations. A risk prediction model was developed to assess the effects of multiple covariates. Main Outcome Measurements: Unplanned reoperation for infection, fixation failure, heterotopic ossification, or bleeding complication. Results: Unplanned reoperations totaled 137 fractures, with an overall rate of 15{\%} (8{\%} infection, 6{\%} fixation failure, <1{\%} heterotopic ossification, and <1{\%} bleeding complication). Reoperations for infection and fixation failure typically occurred within the first month after the index procedure. Four independent predictors of reoperation were open fractures, combined pelvic ring and acetabular injuries, abdominal visceral injuries, and increasing pelvic fracture grade. No independent association was shown between reoperation and patient, treatment, or other injury factors. Conclusions: Unplanned reoperations were relatively common. Infection and fixation failure were the most common indications for unplanned reoperations. Factors associated with reoperation are related to severity of pelvic and abdominal visceral injuries. Our findings suggest that these complications might be inherent and in many cases unavoidable despite appropriate current treatment strategies.",
keywords = "abdominal visceral injury, disruption, fracture, operative treatment, pelvic ring injury, reoperation, risk prediction model",
author = "George Ochenjele and Reid, {Kristoff R.} and Castillo, {Renan Carlos} and Schoonover, {Carrie D.} and Montalvo, {Ryan N.} and Manson, {Theodore T.} and Sciadini, {Marcus F.} and Nascone, {Jason W.} and Carlini, {Anthony R} and O'Toole, {Robert V.}",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/BOT.0000000000001170",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "E245--E250",
journal = "Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma",
issn = "0890-5339",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Predictors of unplanned reoperation after operative treatment of pelvic ring injuries

AU - Ochenjele, George

AU - Reid, Kristoff R.

AU - Castillo, Renan Carlos

AU - Schoonover, Carrie D.

AU - Montalvo, Ryan N.

AU - Manson, Theodore T.

AU - Sciadini, Marcus F.

AU - Nascone, Jason W.

AU - Carlini, Anthony R

AU - O'Toole, Robert V.

PY - 2018/7/1

Y1 - 2018/7/1

N2 - Objectives: To evaluate the incidence of unplanned reoperations after pelvic ring injuries and to develop a risk prediction model. Design: Retrospective review. Setting: Level I Trauma Center. Patients: The medical records of 913 patients (644 male and 269 female patients; mean age, 39 years; age range, 16-89 years) with unstable pelvic ring fractures operatively treated at our center from 2003 to 2015 were reviewed. Intervention: Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the relative contribution of associated clinical parameters to unplanned reoperations. A risk prediction model was developed to assess the effects of multiple covariates. Main Outcome Measurements: Unplanned reoperation for infection, fixation failure, heterotopic ossification, or bleeding complication. Results: Unplanned reoperations totaled 137 fractures, with an overall rate of 15% (8% infection, 6% fixation failure, <1% heterotopic ossification, and <1% bleeding complication). Reoperations for infection and fixation failure typically occurred within the first month after the index procedure. Four independent predictors of reoperation were open fractures, combined pelvic ring and acetabular injuries, abdominal visceral injuries, and increasing pelvic fracture grade. No independent association was shown between reoperation and patient, treatment, or other injury factors. Conclusions: Unplanned reoperations were relatively common. Infection and fixation failure were the most common indications for unplanned reoperations. Factors associated with reoperation are related to severity of pelvic and abdominal visceral injuries. Our findings suggest that these complications might be inherent and in many cases unavoidable despite appropriate current treatment strategies.

AB - Objectives: To evaluate the incidence of unplanned reoperations after pelvic ring injuries and to develop a risk prediction model. Design: Retrospective review. Setting: Level I Trauma Center. Patients: The medical records of 913 patients (644 male and 269 female patients; mean age, 39 years; age range, 16-89 years) with unstable pelvic ring fractures operatively treated at our center from 2003 to 2015 were reviewed. Intervention: Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the relative contribution of associated clinical parameters to unplanned reoperations. A risk prediction model was developed to assess the effects of multiple covariates. Main Outcome Measurements: Unplanned reoperation for infection, fixation failure, heterotopic ossification, or bleeding complication. Results: Unplanned reoperations totaled 137 fractures, with an overall rate of 15% (8% infection, 6% fixation failure, <1% heterotopic ossification, and <1% bleeding complication). Reoperations for infection and fixation failure typically occurred within the first month after the index procedure. Four independent predictors of reoperation were open fractures, combined pelvic ring and acetabular injuries, abdominal visceral injuries, and increasing pelvic fracture grade. No independent association was shown between reoperation and patient, treatment, or other injury factors. Conclusions: Unplanned reoperations were relatively common. Infection and fixation failure were the most common indications for unplanned reoperations. Factors associated with reoperation are related to severity of pelvic and abdominal visceral injuries. Our findings suggest that these complications might be inherent and in many cases unavoidable despite appropriate current treatment strategies.

KW - abdominal visceral injury

KW - disruption

KW - fracture

KW - operative treatment

KW - pelvic ring injury

KW - reoperation

KW - risk prediction model

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060832004&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060832004&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001170

DO - 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001170

M3 - Article

C2 - 29634600

AN - SCOPUS:85060832004

VL - 32

SP - E245-E250

JO - Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

JF - Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

SN - 0890-5339

IS - 7

ER -