Preperitoneal Pelvic Packing versus Angioembolization for Patients with Hemodynamically Unstable Pelvic Fractures with Pelvic Bleeding: A Single-Centered Retrospective Study

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) and angioembolization (AE) for patients with equivocal vital signs after initial resuscitation. This single-centered retrospective study included information from the database of a regional trauma center from April 2014 to December 2022 for patients with pelvic fractures with a systolic blood pressure of 80–100 mmHg after initial fluid resuscitation. The patients’ characteristics, outcomes, and details of AE after resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) placed in zone III were collected. The follow-up duration was from hospital admission to discharge. A total of 65 patients were enrolled in this study. Their mean age was 59.2 ± 18.1 years, and 40 were males. We divided the enrolled patients into PPP (n = 43) and AE (n = 22) groups. The median time from emergency department (ED) to procedure and the median duration of ED stay were significantly longer in the AE group than in the PPP group (p ≤ 0.001 for both). The median mechanical ventilation (MV) duration was significantly shorter (p = 0.046) in the AE group. The number of patients with complications, overall mortality, and mortality due to hemorrhage did not differ between the two groups. Three patients (13.6%) were successfully treated with AE after REBOA. AE may be beneficial for patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures who show equivocal vital signs after initial fluid resuscitation in terms of reducing the MV duration and incidence of infectious complications.