A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Pelvic binder radiography detects occult instability in cadaveric simulated lateral compression type I (LC1) pelvic fractures. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objectives: Occult instability in minimally displaced lateral compression (LC) pelvic ring injuries may have clinical relevance for treatment. We describe two novel LC pelvis fracture stress examinations - pelvic binder stress radiography (PBR) and pelvic binder stress bladder manometry (PBM) - which do not require sedation, anesthesia, patient transport, or radiation of personnel.

Methods: A biomechanical study was performed with five fresh elderly cadavers. Sequential osteotomies of the pelvis simulated increasingly unstable LC pelvis fracture patterns (OTA/AO 61A2.2, 61B1.1a, 61B1.1b, 61B2.1). Compressive force was quantitatively applied using a pelvic binder and scale. Pelvis fracture displacement was measured on AP and inlet fluoroscopic views. Pelvic bladder pressure (PBM) was measured using a Foley catheter as a water column.

Results: Fracture displacement strongly correlated with force applied (R=0.600-0.963). PBR discriminated between simulated LC injuries. Mean displacement of 61B1.1b injuries >1cm was observed at 3.8kg on AP view and 5kg on inlet view. Mean displacement of 61B1.1a injuries >1cm was observed at 8.2kg on AP view and 9.3kg on inlet view. 61A2.2 injuries did not displace >1cm at forces up to 10kg. >95% of 61B1.1a and 61B1.1b injuries displaced >1cm at 10kg. PBM moderately correlated with force applied (R=0.517-0.842) but did not discriminate between LC injuries.

Conclusions: PBR is feasible, precisely quantified occult mechanical instability in simulated LC pelvis fractures in response to reproducible applied force, and discriminated between simulated LC pelvis fractures. PBM did not discriminate between simulated LC fractures. A clinical trial to validate the safety and efficacy of PBR for assessing occult instability in LC pelvis fracture is warranted.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2023.111067DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

pelvic binder
16
pelvis fracture
16
occult instability
12
lateral compression
8
binder stress
8
61b11a 61b11b
8
fracture displacement
8
correlated force
8
force applied
8
discriminated simulated
8

Similar Publications