Review of the treatment options and results of earthquake-related pelvic injuries after the Türkiye earthquake on 6th February

Abstract

The aim of this study was to review the characteristics and classifications of pelvic injuries due to earthquake trauma, to determine the treatment options and outcomes, and to present the experiences of our single trauma center. Sixty patients (23 male, 37 female) who underwent surgical treatment for pelvic ring injuries after the earthquake were analyzed in this study. Demographic data, such as age and gender, operations, and fracture details were recorded. Laboratory results and the amount of blood used were included in the analysis. Fractures were classified according to the Young-Burgess classification. Surgical treatment methods, side of injury, accompanying injuries, and treatment results were analyzed using SPSS software. Left-sided trauma was the most common mechanism of injury, with 36 patients (60%) sustaining left-sided pelvic fractures. Pelvic ring fractures were detected in 78.3% of patients, and combined acetabulum and pelvic ring fractures were identified in 21.7% of patients. Thoracic trauma and extra-pelvic fractures were seen in 12 (20%) and 18 (30%) patients, respectively. Twenty percent of patients underwent emergency abdominal surgery prior to pelvic surgery. Complications were observed in 7 patients (11.6%) in the early period. The average amount of blood used for patients was 2.91 U (min: 0, max: 13 U, SD: 2.66). This study has shown us that lateral compression injuries are more common, and that low hemoglobin levels, high inflammation parameters, previous abdominal surgery, accompanying fractures, and lung injury are the main characteristics of patients with earthquake-related pelvic injuries. It also demonstrates that for the optimal use of materials and implants, experience in different techniques is required, and shows the significant need for blood transfusions in the treatment of these injuries. Level IV, Therapeutic study.

Figure 1.

How many days after the earthquake was the patient taken to the main operation?

Figure 2.

A 32-year-old female patient. (A) Preoperative 3D pelvis CT image, (B) preoperative axial CT image, (C) postoperative AP pelvis X-ray image.

Figure 3.

A 26-year-old female patient. (A) Axial CT image shows sacroiliac joint injury. (B) Postoperative AP pelvis X-ray image.