Early Surgical Stabilization of Flail Chest With Locked Plate Fixation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the results of surgical stabilization with locked plating to nonoperative care of flail chest injuries. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. SETTING: Level II trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: From January 2005 to January 2010, 22 patients with flail chest treated with locked plate fixation were compared with a matched cohort of 28 nonoperatively managed patients at our institution. INTERVENTION: Open reduction internal fixation of rib fractures with 2.7-mm locking reconstruction plates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Demographic data, such as age, sex, injury severity score, number of fractures, and lung contusion severity, were recorded. Intensive care unit data concerning length of stay (LOS), tracheostomy, and ventilator days were noted. Operative data, such as time to OR, operative time, and estimated blood loss, were recorded. Hospital data, including total hospital LOS, need for reintubation, and home oxygen requirements, were documented. RESULTS: Average follow-up period of operatively managed patients was 17.84 ± 4.51 months, with a range of 13-22 months. No case of hardware failure, hardware prominence, wound infection, or nonunion was reported. Operatively treated patients had shorter intensive care unit stays (7.59 vs. 9.68 days, P = 0.018), decreased ventilator requirements (4.14 vs. 9.68 days, P = 0.007), shorter hospital LOS (11.9 vs. 19.0 days, P = 0.006), fewer tracheostomies (4.55% vs. 39.29%, P = 0.042), less pneumonia (4.55% vs. 25%, P = 0.047), less need for reintubation (4.55% vs. 17.86%, P = 0.34), and decreased home oxygen requirements (4.55% vs. 17.86%, P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential benefits of surgical stabilization of flail chest with locked plate fixation. When compared with case-matched controls, operatively managed patients demonstrated improved clinical outcomes. Locked plate fixation seems to be safe as no complications associated with hardware failure, plate prominence, wound infection, or nonunion were noted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".