Management of exsanguinating pelvic trauma: Do we still need the radiologist?

Background: The hemodynamically unstable pelvic fracture are a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The current management is based on the control of pelvic bleeding by combining pelvic ring stabilization and embolization of pelvic arteries. The mortality of these patients, however, exceeds 30%. Recently the preperitoneal packing, based on the hemostatic tamponade of the pelvic cavity has been described. The objective of this study was to evaluate the interest of this new surgical procedure. The effectiveness of the standard algorithm is evaluated by analysis of pelvic injuries in 200 severe trauma treated at the Sainte-Anne Hospital. The results are then compared with literature data on the preperitoneal packing. Patients and methods: The profile injury, management and morbidity and mortality was evaluated in 200 polytrauma. After an initial phase of resuscitation, unstable pelvic fractures were treated with a circumferential belt followed by the application of an external fixator. Arteriography was performed for all patients with persistent hemodynamic instability. Results: The mean injury severity score (ISS) was 31 (4-75). The mean trauma-related injury severity score (TRISS) was 74% (3-99). The proportion of hemodynamically unstable patients was 47%. Fifteen patients (41%) had severe bleeding. The median number of blood transfusion was 10 (4-42); eight patients (22%) underwent embolization. For two patients, reducing the pelvic fracture with an external fixator resulted in permanent hemostasis. Two patients underwent a laparotomy first, for the control of a hemoperitoneum. The mortality rate of the group of patients with hemorrhage was 33% (5/15). Discussion: This high mortality leads to reconsider the place of pelvic embolization as firstline treatment. Some major drawbacks are noted: its effectiveness in treating venous bleeding, availability and duration of the procedure. The preperitoneal packing is a fast and effective surgical alternative. It seems to improve hemodynamic status of patients and significantly reduce the use of embolization and massive transfusion. Embolization is still indicated for patients not responding to surgery. However survival is not significantly improved. (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.