Introduction
Angioembolisation (AE) and/or pre-peritoneal pelvic packing (PPP) may be necessary for patients with complex pelvic fractures who are haemodynamically unstable. However, it remains unclear whether AE or PPP should be performed as an initial intervention and ongoing debates exist. This meta-analysis aimed to compare AE versus PPP in haemodynamically unstable patients with acute pelvic fractures. The primary outcomes of interest were to compare in-hospital mortality rate and number of blood units transfused. Secondary outcomes included evaluating differences in the time from diagnosis to treatment, as well as the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital.
Methods
All clinically relevant studies comparing AE versus PPP in patients with complex pelvic fractures and haemodynamic instability were accessed. The 2020 PRISMA guidelines were followed. In September 2023, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Embase, without constraint.
Results
Data from 320 patients were collected (AE: 174; PPP: 146). The mean age on admission was 47.4 ± 7.2 years. The mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) on admission was 43.5 + 5.4 points. Baseline comparability was observed in ISS (P = 0.5, Table 3) and mean age (P = 0.7, Table 3). No difference was reported in mortality rate (P = 0.2) or rate of blood units transfused (P = 0.3). AE had a longer mean time to the procedure of 44.6 min compared to PPP (P = 0.04). The mean length of ICU and hospital stay were similar in both groups.
Conclusion
Despite the longer mean time from admission to the procedure, no significant differences were found between AE and PPP in terms of in-hospital mortality, blood units transfused, or length of ICU, and hospital stay. These findings should be interpreted considering the limitations of the present study. High-quality comparative research is strongly warranted.
Level of evidence
Level IV, meta-analysis.
