RibLoc U Plus Chest Wall Plating System

In this study, we assessed the bending strength of two surgical repairs of rib fracture using RibLoc® U Plus system made by Acute Innovations and the anterior plate by Synthes.

After a rib fracture was created in seven pairs of cadaveric rib specimens, one side was repaired with the anterior plate and the other side repaired with the RibLoc U Plus® plate. Each of the rib is loaded using a custom device over 360,000 bending cycles to simulate in vivo fatiguing related to respiration. Upon completion of the cyclic loading, the specimens were compressively loaded to failure and the failure bending moment was determined.

The ribs repaired with the RibLoc U Plus® system showed 79% higher failure bending moment than that of the anterior plate, with a p value of 0.033. The ribs repaired with RibLoc U Plus® showed a trend of less stiffness reduction over the 360,000 loading cycles.

The biomechanical study showed that the RibLoc U Plus® system is stronger in the bending moment loading of repaired ribs, possibly due to the U-shape structure supporting both the inner and outer cortices of a repaired rib.

Blunt trauma to the chest wall and rib fractures are remarkably frequent and are the basis of considerable morbidity and possible mortality. Surgical remedies for highly displaced rib fractures, especially in cases of flail chest, have been undertaken intermittently for more than 50 years. Rib-specific plating systems have started to be used in the last 10 years. These have ushered in the modern era of rib repair with chest wall stabilization (CWS) techniques that are safer, easier to perform, and more efficient. Recent consensus statements have sought to define the indications and contraindications, as well as the when, the how, and the technical details of CWS. Repair should be considered for patients who have three or more displaced rib fractures or a flail chest, whether or not mechanical ventilation is required. Additional candidates include patients who fail non-operative management irrespective of fracture pattern and those with rib fractures who need thoracic procedures for other reasons. Traditionally, unstable spine fracture and severe traumatic brain injury are definite contraindications. Pulmonary contusion’s role in the decision to perform CWS remains controversial. A range of rib-specific plating systems are now commercially available.

Patient outcomes after muscle sparing minimally invasive thoracotomy rib fixation (MSMIT-ORF) in geriatric G60 trauma patients remain poorly studied. This study determined the effect of MSMIT-ORF on pulmonary function (PFT). Non-operatively managed (NOM) patients were also described.

Medical records of G60 patients with severe rib fractures with PFTs measured before and after MSMIT-ORF were examined. Patient outcomes (MSMIT-ORF vs NOM) were adjusted in a multivariate logistic regression model.

64 patients underwent MSMIT-ORF, 135 were NOM patients. MSMIT-ORF treated patients showed improvements in PFTs on postoperative day 5, p = 0.001. After adjustment analysis, MSMIT-ORF was associated with increased hospital length of stay (OR 44.9; 95% CI, 9.8-205, p < 0.001), but a more favorable discharge disposition. There was no difference in the rates of pneumonia (p = 0.996) or death (p = 0.140).

MSMIT-ORF is safe and improves pulmonary function in G60 trauma patients diagnosed with severe rib fractures. Future randomized control studies are needed for confirmation.

Thoracic trauma (TT) is common among people with multiple traumatic injuries. One of the injuries caused by TT is the loss of thoracic stability resulting from multiple fractures of the rib cage, otherwise known as flail chest (FC). A person with FC can be treated conservatively with orotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation (internal pneumatic stabilization) but may also undergo surgery to fix the costal fractures.

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgical stabilization compared with clinical management for people with FC.

We ran the search on the 12 May 2014. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group’s Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE Classic and EMBASE (OvidSP), CINAHL Plus (EBSCO), ISI WOS (SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, CPCI-S, and CPSI-SSH), and clinical trials registers. We also screened reference lists and contacted experts.

Randomized controlled trials of surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for people diagnosed with FC.

Two review authors selected relevant trials, assessed their risk of bias, and extracted data.

We included three studies that involved 123 people. The methods used for blinding the participants and researchers to the treatment group were not reported, but as the comparison is surgical treatment with medical treatment this bias is hard to avoid. There was no description of concealment of the randomization sequence in two studies.All three studies reported on mortality, and deaths occurred in two studies. There was no clear evidence of a difference in mortality between treatment groups (risk ratio (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 2.42); however, the analysis was underpowered to detect a difference between groups. Out of the 123 people randomized and treated, six people died; the causes of death were pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, mediastinitis, and septic shock.Among people randomized to surgery, there were reductions in pneumonia (RR 0.36, 95% 0.15 to 0.85; three studies, 123 participants), chest deformity (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.67; two studies, 86 participants), and tracheostomy (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.02; two studies, 83 participants). Duration of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit stay (ICU), and length of hospital stay were measured in the three studies. Due to differences in reporting, we could not combine the results and have listed them separately. Chest pain, chest tightness, bodily pain, and adverse effects were each measured in one study.

There was some evidence from three small studies that showed surgical treatment was preferable to nonsurgical management in reducing pneumonia, chest deformity, tracheostomy, duration of mechanical ventilation, and length of ICU stay. Further well-designed studies with a sufficient sample size are required to confirm these results and to detect possible surgical effects on mortality.

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing operative to nonoperative therapy in adult FC patients. Outcomes were duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV), intensive care unit length of stay (ICULOS), hospital length of stay (HLOS), mortality, incidence of pneumonia, and tracheostomy.

Flail chest (FC) results in paradoxical chest wall movement, altered respiratory mechanics, and frequent respiratory failure. Despite advances in ventilatory management, FC remains associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Operative fixation of the flail segment has been advocated as an adjunct to supportive care, but no definitive clinical trial exists to delineate the role of surgery.

A comprehensive search of 5 electronic databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials and observational studies (cohort or case-control). Pooled effect size (ES) or relative risk (RR) was calculated using a fixed or random effects model, as appropriate.

Nine studies with a total of 538 patients met inclusion criteria. Compared with control treatment, operative management of FC was associated with shorter DMV [pooled ES: -4.52 days; 95% confidence interval (CI): -5.54 to -3.50], ICULOS (-3.40 days; 95% CI: -6.01 to -0.79), HLOS (-3.82 days; 95% CI: -7.12 to -0.54), and decreased mortality (pooled RR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.28-0.69), pneumonia (0.45; 95% CI: 0.30-0.69), and tracheostomy (0.25; 95% CI: 0.13-0.47).

As compared with nonoperative therapy, operative fixation of FC is associated with reductions in DMV, LOS, mortality, and complications associated with prolonged MV. These findings support the need for an adequately powered clinical study to further define the role of this intervention.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to present current evidence on rib fixation and to compare effect estimates obtained from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies.

MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched on June 16th 2017 for both RCTs and observational studies comparing rib fixation versus nonoperative treatment. The MINORS criteria were used to assess study quality. Where possible, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. The primary outcome measure was mortality. Secondary outcome measures were hospital length of stay (HLOS), intensive care unit length of stay (ILOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV), pneumonia, and tracheostomy.

Thirty-three studies were included resulting in 5874 patients with flail chest or multiple rib fractures: 1255 received rib fixation and 4619 nonoperative treatment. Rib fixation for flail chest reduced mortality compared to nonoperative treatment with a risk ratio of 0.41 (95% CI 0.27, 0.61, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%). Furthermore, rib fixation resulted in a shorter ILOS, DMV, lower pneumonia rate, and need for tracheostomy. Results from recent studies showed lower mortality and shorter DMV after rib fixation, but there were no significant differences for the other outcome measures. There was insufficient data to perform meta-analyses on rib fixation for multiple rib fractures. Pooled results from RCTs and observational studies were similar for all outcome measures, although results from RCTs showed a larger treatment effect for HLOS, ILOS, and DMV compared to observational studies.

Rib fixation for flail chest improves short-term outcome, although the indication and patient subgroup who would benefit most remain unclear. There is insufficient data regarding treatment for multiple rib fractures. Observational studies show similar results compared with RCTs.

The risk factors for mortality following blunt chest wall trauma have neither been well established or summarised.

To summarise the risk factors for mortality in blunt chest wall trauma patients based on available evidence in the literature.

A systematic review of English and non-English articles using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from their introduction until May 2010. Additional studies were identified by hand-searching bibliographies and contacting relevant clinical experts. Grey literature was sought by searching abstracts from all Emergency Medicine conferences. Broad search terms and inclusion criteria were used to reduce the number of missed studies.

A two step study selection process was used. All published and unpublished observational studies were included if they investigated estimates of association between a risk factor and mortality for blunt chest wall trauma patients.

A two step data extraction process using pre-defined data fields, including study quality indicators.

Each study was appraised using a previously designed quality assessment tool and the STROBE checklist. Where sufficient data were available, odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel method for the risk factors investigated. The I(2) statistic was calculated for combined studies in order to assess heterogeneity.

Age, number of rib fractures, presence of pre-existing disease and pneumonia were found to be related to mortality in 29 identified studies. Combined odds ratio of 1.98 (1.86-2.11, 95% CI), 2.02 (1.89-2.15, 95% CI), 2.43 (1.03-5.72, 95% CI) and 5.24 (3.51-7.82) for mortality were calculated for blunt chest wall trauma patients aged 65 years or more, with three or more rib fractures, pre-existing conditions and pneumonia respectively.

The risk factors for mortality in patients sustaining blunt chest wall trauma were a patient age of 65 years or more, three or more rib fractures and the presence of pre-existing disease especially cardiopulmonary disease. The development of pneumonia post injury was also a significant risk factor for mortality. As a result of the variable quality in the studies, the results of the selected studies should be interpreted with caution.