A Prospective Observational Study on the Outcome Assessment of Conservative Management Versus Intercostal Drainage (ICD) in Blunt Chest Injury Patients With ≤3 Rib Fractures in a North Indian Tertiary Care Center

Abstract

Introduction Trauma is the third most common cause of death in all age groups. One out of four trauma patients die due to thoracic injury or its complications. Seventy percent of thoracic traumas are due to blunt injury. This indicates the importance of chest trauma among all traumas. Quick and precise assessment bears paramount importance in deciding life-saving and definitive management. Often, the initial management in blunt injury patients is based on subjective assessment by the attending clinician. A scoring system that provides early identification of the patients at the greatest risk for respiratory failure and more likely to require mechanical ventilation and require prolonged care, as well as those with a higher mortality risk, may allow the early institution of intervention to improve outcomes. Thoracic Trauma Severity Score (TTSS) poses to be a precise tool in directing the management modality to be employed. Methodology This was an observational study including 112 patients of age >12 years, with blunt chest injury, sustaining ≤3 rib fractures, and with a stable chest wall. The patients with penetrating injury, those with blunt chest injury having flail segment, patients in the pediatric age group (<12 years), or polytrauma patients were excluded from our study. Of the 112 patients, 56 had been managed by intercostal drainage (ICD), and the rest (56) had been managed conservatively. Result Road traffic accidents (RTA) were the most common mode of injury in both groups. The percentage of the patients with one, two, and three rib fractures was 57.14%, 32.14%, and 10.71%, respectively, in the ICD group and 85.71%, 7.14%, and 7.14%, respectively, in the conservative management group (p = 0.124). The mean TTSS score was significantly more in the ICD group as compared to the conservative management group in the single rib fracture patients (p = 0.001*), as well as all patients of any number of rib fractures (p < 0.01*) (significance was defined as a value of p less than 0.05 {indicated by an asterisk}). The mean hospital stay was significantly lower in the conservative group as compared to the ICD group (p < 0.01*). The mean SF-36 (outcome) was significantly more in the conservative management group as compared to the ICD group (p = 0.020*). The mean cost of treatment was significantly more in the ICD group as compared to the conservative management group (p < 0.001*). Conclusion In our study, a TTSS (as measured by the primary care surgeon) of >7, across any number of rib fractures, was preferably predictive of management by ICD, while a <7 value was favorable for conservative management. TTSS can be used as an important tool to predict the management modality in blunt chest injury patients with ≤3 rib fractures.