Interval versus external fixation for the treatment of pelvic fractures: A comparative study

Abstract

Purpose: This retrospective study evaluated the efficacy and safety of internal fixation (IF) in the treatment of pelvic fractures (PF). Methods: A total of 263 unstable PF patients were treated from February 2009 to April 2015. Patients were divided into two groups according to type of fixation used to treat their PF: 136 cases received IF surgery (IF group); and, 127 cases received external fixation (EF) surgery (EF group). Postoperative follow-ups were conducted to record the clinical data, perioperative clinical indicators, Matta scores for fracture displacements, Majeed scores for hip functions and postoperative complications. Results: Operation time, blood loss, the total length of the wound, postoperative fever rate, hospitalization time and complication rate for the IF group were significantly decreased in comparison with the EF group, while the ratings of pain, working and sitting ability and Matta and Majeed scores of the IF group were significantly higher than those of the EF group. Conclusion: IF was found to be associated with shorter operation times, less blood loss and better postoperative rehabilitation in comparison with EF, suggesting that it is an effective therapy for the treatment of unstable PF and will lead to restoration of normal pelvis functions.