TY - JOUR
T1 - Angioembolization Has Similar Efficacy and Lower Total Charges than Preperitoneal Pelvic Packing in Patients with Pelvic Ring or Acetabulum Fractures
AU - Singh, Aaron
AU - Kotzur, Travis
AU - Koslosky, Ezekial
AU - Gonuguntla, Rishi
AU - Canseco, Lorenzo
AU - Momtaz, David
AU - Seifi, Ali
AU - Martin, Case
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2024/5/1
Y1 - 2024/5/1
N2 - OBJECTIVES:To compare cost, hospital-related outcomes, and mortality between angioembolization (AE) and preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) in the setting of pelvic ring or acetabulum fractures.METHODS:.Design:Retrospective database review.Setting:National Inpatient Sample, years 2016-2020.Patient Selection Criteria:Hospitalized adult patients who underwent AE or PPP in the setting of a pelvic ring or acetabulum fracture.Outcome Measures and Comparisons:Mortality and hospital-associated outcomes, including total charges, following AE versus PPP in the setting of pelvic ring or acetabulum fractures.RESULTS:A total of 3780 patients, 3620 undergoing AE and 160 undergoing PPP, were included. No significant differences in mortality, length of stay, time to procedure, or discharge disposition were found (P > 0.05); however, PPP was associated with significantly greater charges than AE (P = 0.04). Patients who underwent AE had a mean total charge of $250,062.88 while those undergoing PPP had a mean total charge of $369,137.16.CONCLUSIONS:Despite equivalent clinical efficacy in terms of mortality and hospital-related outcomes, PPP was associated with significantly greater charges than AE in the setting of pelvic ring or acetabulum fractures. This data information can inform clinical management of these patients and assist trauma centers in resource allocation.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
AB - OBJECTIVES:To compare cost, hospital-related outcomes, and mortality between angioembolization (AE) and preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) in the setting of pelvic ring or acetabulum fractures.METHODS:.Design:Retrospective database review.Setting:National Inpatient Sample, years 2016-2020.Patient Selection Criteria:Hospitalized adult patients who underwent AE or PPP in the setting of a pelvic ring or acetabulum fracture.Outcome Measures and Comparisons:Mortality and hospital-associated outcomes, including total charges, following AE versus PPP in the setting of pelvic ring or acetabulum fractures.RESULTS:A total of 3780 patients, 3620 undergoing AE and 160 undergoing PPP, were included. No significant differences in mortality, length of stay, time to procedure, or discharge disposition were found (P > 0.05); however, PPP was associated with significantly greater charges than AE (P = 0.04). Patients who underwent AE had a mean total charge of $250,062.88 while those undergoing PPP had a mean total charge of $369,137.16.CONCLUSIONS:Despite equivalent clinical efficacy in terms of mortality and hospital-related outcomes, PPP was associated with significantly greater charges than AE in the setting of pelvic ring or acetabulum fractures. This data information can inform clinical management of these patients and assist trauma centers in resource allocation.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
KW - acetabulum fracture
KW - angioembolization
KW - orthopaedic trauma
KW - packing
KW - pelvic fracture
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85190846562&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85190846562&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002789
DO - 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002789
M3 - Article
C2 - 38378177
AN - SCOPUS:85190846562
SN - 0890-5339
VL - 38
SP - 254
EP - 258
JO - Journal of orthopaedic trauma
JF - Journal of orthopaedic trauma
IS - 5
ER -