ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to determine if differences in clinical diagnosis versus autopsy findings concerning the cause of death in polytrauma fatalities would be detected in 19 cases of fatal polytrauma from a Level 1 trauma centre.MethodsClinical diagnoses determining the cause of death in 19 cases of fatal polytrauma (2007 - 2008) from a Level 1 trauma centre were correlated with autopsy findings.ResultsIn 13 cases (68%), the clinical cause of death and the cause of death as determined by autopsy were congruent. Marginal differences occurred in three (16%) patients while obvious differences in interpreting the cause of death were found in another three (16%) cases. Five fatalities (three with obvious differences and two with marginal differences) were remarked as early death (1-4 h after trauma) and one fatality with marginal differences as late death (>1 week after trauma). Obvious and marginal discrepancies mostly occurred in the early phase of treatment, especially when severely injured patients were admitted to the emergency room undergoing continued cardiopulmonary resuscitation, i. e. limiting diagnostic procedures, and thus the clinical cause of death was essentially determined by basic emergency diagnostics.ConclusionsAutopsy as golden standard to define the cause of death in fatal polytrauma varies from the clinical point of view, depending on the patient's pre-existing condition, mechanism of polytrauma, necessity of traumatic cardiopulmonary resuscitation, survival time, and thus the possibility to perform emergency diagnostics. An autopsy should be performed at least in cases of early fatal polytrauma to help establishing the definite cause of death. Moreover, autopsy data should be included in trauma registries as a quality assessment tool.

Although the clinical course in malpositioned pedicle screw instrumentation may stay unremarkable, this case illustrates that in a proven injury to the thoracic aorta revision is mandatory to prevent further vascular damage. The appropriate strategy demands exact and provident planning using a preferably interdisciplinary approach.

The management of proximal tibial fractures has evolved significantly in recent years. While the main goals of treatment – stability, restoration of the mechanical axis, and smooth articular surfaces – remain the same, methods have advanced substantially. In diagnostics, technical progress in CT and MR imaging has led to a better three-dimensional understanding of the injury. Newly developed classification systems such as the three-column concept of Luo et al. and the 10-segment concept of Krause et al. take this into account. Accordingly, there is a trend towards tailored approaches for particular fracture localizations. Parallel to this development, there is increasing evidence of the advantages of arthroscopically assisted surgical procedures. This Current Concepts article reviews classifications, diagnostics, treatment options as well as complications in fractures of the proximal tibia.

A 35-year-old female patient sustained three contiguous vertebral fractures at the thoracolumbar junction while jumping off the third floor in a suicide attempt. Initial fracture treatment occurred in the setting of a multiple injury scenario. While the Th12 and the L1 vertebral fractures were considered stable, the L2 fracture exhibited a complete burst configuration with 80% canal compromise due to a posterior wall fragment causing paraplegia. A posterior pedicle screw stabilisation with indirect fracture reduction was carried out initially from T12 to L3. At 1 year follow-up the patient presented to us for new onset radiculopathy L2, and loss of correction. A circumferential revision surgery with an expandable cage was carried out to restore the anterior and posterior columns. Unfortunately again loss of reduction with kyphosis occurred, this time at the upper instrumented vertebra, which made another revision necessary. In this situation a longer construct was chosen using a combined approach and a Mesh cage. This later procedure was complicated by a postoperative paraparesis believed to be vascular in origin. Six months later a further complication involving MSSA deep wound infection required a series of irrigation debridement for healing. At the 2.5 years follow up the spine was stable and the patient had a neurologic recovery allowing her to ambulate with crutches. This Grand Round Case raises the question on the initial management of multiply injured patients with spine fracture, the classification of these fractures, the optimal initial internal fixation, the need for complementary anterior column reconstruction and the strategy when all these fails.

No abstract