↓ Skip to main content

Lateral compression type B 2-1 pelvic ring fractures in young patients do not require surgery

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Lateral compression type B 2-1 pelvic ring fractures in young patients do not require surgery
Published in
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00068-016-0676-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Höch, I. Schneider, J. Todd, C. Josten, J. Böhme

Abstract

According to Young and Burgess, type B 2-1 pelvic fractures are a type of lateral compression fracture (LC-1) and are the most common pelvic injury at all ages. Although they are considered unstable in rotation and despite biomechanical recommendations for anterior stabilization, most authors recommend non-operative treatment. However, studies comparing outcomes and complications regarding operative versus non-operative treatment are still scarce. Seventy-one patients aged under 65 years with a type B 2-1 pelvic fracture were treated between 2006 and 2011. Patients in Group I (n = 35) were treated non-operatively and patients in Group II (n = 36) were treated operatively. Postoperative complications, clinical course, and follow-up (VAS for Pain, SF 36, EQ-5D) of at least 1 year postoperatively were evaluated. Our data show that operatively treated patients had a significantly higher complication rate. Preoperatively, the only significant difference between the non-operative and operative groups was the amount of anterior fracture dislocation and the presence of an isolated pelvic ring fracture. In the postoperative follow-up, no significant differences were found regarding pain or quality of life. Type B 2-1 pelvic ring fractures in young patients should be treated non-operatively.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 21%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Unknown 12 35%