Objectives:
To quantify the acute immunologic biomarker response in multiply injured patients with axial and lower extremity fractures and to explore associations with adverse short-term outcomes including organ dysfunction and nosocomial infection (NI).
Design:
Prospective cohort study.
Setting:
Level 1 academic trauma center.
Patients:
Consecutive multiply injured patients, 18–55 years of age, with major pelvic and lower extremity orthopaedic injuries (all pelvic/acetabular fractures, operative femur and tibia fractures) that presented as a trauma activation and admitted to the intensive care unit from April 2015 through October 2016. Sixty-one patients met inclusion criteria.
Intervention:
Blood was collected upon presentation to the hospital and at the following time points: 8, 24, 48 hours, and daily during intensive care unit admission. Blood was processed by centrifugation, separation into 1.0-mL plasma aliquots, and cryopreserved within 2 hours of collection.
Main Outcome Measurements:
Plasma analyses of protein levels of cytokines/chemokines were performed using a Luminex panel Bioassay of 20 immunologic mediators. Organ dysfunction was measured by the Marshall Multiple Organ Dysfunction score (MODScore) and nosocomial infection (NI) was recorded. Patients were stratified into low (MODS ≤ 4; n = 34) and high (MODS > 4; n = 27) organ dysfunction groups.
Results:
The MODS >4 group had higher circulating levels of interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, IL-10, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), IL-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA), and monokine induced by interferon gamma (MIG) compared with the MODS ≤4 group at nearly all time points. MODS >4 exhibited lower levels of IL-21 and IL-22 compared with MODS ≤4. Patients who developed NI (n = 24) had higher circulating concentrations of IL-10, MIG, and high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) compared with patients who did not develop NI (n = 37).
Conclusions:
Temporal quantification of immune mediators identified 8 biomarkers associated with greater levels of organ dysfunction in polytrauma patients with major orthopaedic injuries.
Level of Evidence:
Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Purpose
Total hip arthroplasty (THA) using the direct anterior approach (DAA) is known to have a learning curve. The purpose of this study was to review cases where surgery was performed by an arthroplasty surgeon transitioning from the posterior approach (PA) to the DAA. We hypothesized similar complication rates and improvements in surgical duration over time.
Materials and Methods
A review of 2,452 consecutive primary THAs was conducted. Surgical duration, length of stay (LOS), surgical complications, decrease in postoperative day (POD) 1 hemoglobin, transfusion rates, POD 0 and POD 1 pain scores, incision length, leg length discrepancy (LLD), and radiographic cup position were recorded.
Results
No differences in surgical duration were observed after the first 50 DAA cases. A shorter LOS was observed for the DAA, and statistical difference was appreciated after the first 100 DAA cases. There were no differences in periprosthetic fractures. A higher rate of infections and hip dislocations were observed with the PA. The PA showed an association with higher transfusion rates without significant difference in POD 1 decrease in hemoglobin over the first 100 DAA cases. Similar POD 0 and POD 1 pain scores with a smaller incision were observed for the first 100 DAA cases. The DAA cohort showed less variation in cup inclination, version, and LLD.
Conclusion
DAA is safe and non-inferior in terms of reduced LOS, smaller incision, and less variation in cup position. Fifty DAA cases was noted to be the learning curve required before no differences in duration between approaches were observed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.