Outcomes of Preperitoneal Packing and Angioembolization for Hemorrhage Control in Hemodynamically Unstable Pelvic Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background Hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures are often life-threatening injuries; however, the optimal management remains uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the most appropriate primary management of hemorrhage in adult patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures by comparing outcomes following the initial use of preperitoneal packing (PPP) vs angioembolization (AE). Methods A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and ProQuest databases was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Studies assessing hemorrhage management in trauma patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures were included. The data extracted from selected articles included patient demographics, study design, and outcomes such as 24-hour PRBC transfusions, in-hospital mortality, and DVT rate. Results Eight articles were included in the systematic review. Among the included studies, 2040 patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures were analyzed. Meta-analyses revealed that treatment with PPP was associated with fewer 24-hour PRBC transfusions (mean difference = −1.0, 95% CI: −1.8 to −.2) than AE. However, no significant differences were noted in in-hospital mortality (RR: .91, 95% CI: .80-1.05) and the rate of deep vein thrombosis (RR: .89, 95% CI: .62-1.28) between groups. Conclusion The findings of this study suggest that primary management with PPP was associated with fewer 24-hour PRBC transfusions compared to AE. The choice of primary management with PPP or AE did not significantly impact in-hospital mortality. Future studies should address clinical outcomes and the factors that affect them to better understand the impact of different management strategies and direct the creation of practice management guidelines.