CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03221595CWISNONFLAILUpdated May 6, 2021Results posted

Multicenter RCT of SSRF in Non Flail Patients

An interventional study of Operative in Rib Fracture Multiple, sponsored by Denver Health and Hospital Authority. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-05-06.

Sponsored by Denver Health and Hospital Authority · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
110
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study evaluates the efficacy of surgical stabilization of rib fractures, as compared to best medical management, for patients with multiple, displaced rib fractures.

Half of patients will be randomized to surgery (in addition to best medical management), whereas the other half will be randomized to medical therapy only.

The primary outcome will be the subjects overall quality of life measured at two months following injury.

Read the detailed description

Rib fracture are the most common serious injury following blunt trauma, and occur in approximately 10% of trauma patients [1]. Despite improvements in the care of rib fracture patients, outcomes remain poor and have not changed substantially over the last 15 years [2]. Poor outcomes resulting from serious rib fractures include both acute complications (e.g., pneumonia, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and death) and chronic disability (e.g., pain, dyspnea, and loss of productivity).

Over the last 10 years, surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) has emerged as a promising technology for the management of patients with severe chest wall injuries [3]. Conceptually, SSRF applies the fundamental orthopedic principles of reduction and fixation to rib fractures, restoring chest wall stability and minimizing pain with respiration, splinting, and secretion accumulation. The advent of muscle-sparring [4] and even minimally-invasive surgical techniques [5], as well as a relatively low complication rate [6], has improved the appeal of this operation.

To date, three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) [7-9] and three meta-analyses of these and other trials [10-12] have limited their scope to patients with flail chest, a specific clinical diagnosis characterized by paradoxical motion of a portion of the chest wall due to fractures of two or more ribs in at least two places. Flail chest represents the most severe form of chest wall injury, with an associated, very high morbidity and mortality. Each of the aforementioned RCTs, as well as multiple prospective, non-randomized investigations [13, 14], have found a benefit to SSRF as compared to best medical management in this patient population. Accordingly, expert consensus statements have recommended this operation in this subset of patients [3, 15].

Based upon the favorable reported efficacy of SSRF in patients with flail chest, many surgeons have broadened indications to patients with severe, non-flail rib fracture patterns, most commonly ≥ 3 severely displaced fractures. Although these injuries differ anatomically from flail chest, many of the same pathophysiologic principles are at work: namely, painful motion at the fracture sites cause respiratory compromise, bony bridging [16], and risk of subsequent non-union, chronic pain, and restrictive lung disease. However, it is not clear if stabilization of these fractures confers the same benefits as in the case of flail chest. This lack of efficacy data has been recognized in recent guidelines, which were unable to recommend SSRF for non-flail fracture patterns pending further data. Furthermore, long term quality of life data for both flail and non-flail fracture patterns managed with SSRF are not available.

The use of SSRF is increasing exponentially. Somewhat alarmingly, nearly one half of the procedures were performed in patients without flail chest [17]. A combination of the favorable results observed for SSRD in flail chest, the increasing prevalence of SSRF for non flail-chest, and the lack of quality evidence to support this operation in this patient population, lead to the design of the current RCT. The objective of this trial is to investigate the efficacy of SSRF, as compared to non-operative management, for hospitalized patients with specific, non-flail, severe rib fractures, and within expert, high volume centers that participate in the Chest Wall Injury Society. The investigators hypothesize that SSRF, as compared to standardized medical management, improves pain control, pulmonary function, risk of complications, and quality of life among patients with severe, non-flail chest fracture patterns.

02

Conditions studied

03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 80 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  1. Hospitalization with ≥ 3 severely displaced (≥ 50% of rib width) acute rib fractures.
  2. Two or more of the following pulmonary physiologic derangements (at the time of consideration for enrollment and after best medical therapy).

    1. Respiratory rate > 20 breaths per minute
    2. Incentive spirometry \< 50% predicted (appendix D)
    3. Numeric pain score > 5
    4. Poor cough (as documented by respiratory therapist)
  3. Surgery anticipated \< 72 hours from injury

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Age \< 18 years or ≥ 80 years
  2. Flail chest: either radiographic or clinical. Radiographic flail chest is defined on CT chest as ≥ 2 ribs each fractured in ≥ 2 places. Clinical flail is defined as visualization of a segment of chest wall with paradoxical motion on physical exam.
  3. Moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (GCS at the time of consideration for enrollment \< 12)
  4. Intubation
  5. Severe pulmonary contusion, defined as Blunt Pulmonary Contusion 18 (BPC18) score > 12 [19].
  6. Prior or expected emergency exploratory laparotomy during this admission.
  7. Prior or expected emergency thoracotomy during this admission.
  8. Prior or expected emergency craniotomy during this admission.
  9. Spinal cord injury
  10. Pelvic fracture that has required, or is expected to require, operative intervention during this admission.
  11. The patient was unable to accomplish activities of daily living independently prior to injury (e.g., dressing, bathing, prepearing meals).
  12. Pregnancy.
  13. Incarceration.
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
110 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Operative

    Patients in the operative arm will undergo best medical management, in addition to surgical stabilization of their displaced rib fractures within 72 hours of admission to the hospital.

    Device: Operative

  • No intervention
    Non-operative

    Patients in the non operative arm will undergo best medical management of their displaced rib fractures.

Interventions

  • DeviceOperative

    This operation involves reducing and providing rigid fixation of displaced rib fractures with permanent plates or splints

    Also known as: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures, rib plating

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Numeric Pain Score

    Patient self-reported pain score on an 11 point scale scale ranging from 0-10; 0 being "no pain" to 10 "the worst pain imaginable".

    Time frame: Hospital days 1-7, day of discharge (an average of 1 week) and at 2, 4 and 8 weeks following discharge from hospital.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Length of Stay

    Patient length of stay in hospital and/or ICU.

    Time frame: 2 months after injury

  2. Daily Narcotic Use

    Total standardized narcotic equivalents per day, which is calculated using an equil-analgesic scale: Narcotic Dose Unit Route Hydromorphone 1.5 mg IV Hydromorphone 7.5 mg PO Fentanyl 100 mcg IV Morphine 10 mg IV Morphine 30 mg PO Oxycodone 20 mg PO Hydrocodone 30 mg PO \*IV, intravenous; mcg, micrograms; mg, milligrams; PO, per oral

    Time frame: Inpatient: occurred daily at 10 AM while the patient was hospitalized. Post-discharge: occurred at outpatient clinic follow-up encounter that occurred at 2, 4, and 8 weeks post discharge.

  3. Incentive Spirometry

    The maximum volume (ml) of inspired air through a handheld device called an incentive spirometer. Best value of 3 attempts is recorded. The value of the inspired volume is normalized for patients age, sex, and height and in measured in the percent predicted for that particular individual.

    Time frame: Inpatient: occurred daily at 10 AM while the patient was hospitalized. Post-discharge: occurred at outpatient clinic follow-up encounter that occurred at 2, 4, and 8 weeks post discharge.

  4. Pulmonary Function Testing

    Forced expired volume in 1 second, measured in pulmonary function lab

    Time frame: once, at first follow-up, outpatient, clinic visit, which occurred at 2 weeks post discharge.

  5. Number of Patients With Pneumonia

    CDC definition of nosocomial pneumonia

    Time frame: Study participants were followed up to 2 months after index admission date.

  6. Days of Ventilator-dependent Respiratory Failure

    Mechanical ventilation for \> 24 hours at any time during index hospitalization

    Time frame: Study participants were followed up to 2 months after index admission date.

  7. Chest Wall Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire

    An 8 question, validated quality of life (QoL) questionnaire administered at outpatient, clinic follow-up encounters after discharge from the index admission. Minimum score is 0 and indicates the worst outcome of QoL while maximum score is 55, which indicates the highest outcome of QoL.

    Time frame: 2, 4 and 8 weeks after discharge from the index admission

06

Results

Posted Apr 5, 2021

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneOperativeNon-Operative
Started5159
Completed5159
Not completed00

Outcome measures

PrimaryNumeric Pain Score

Patient self-reported pain score on an 11 point scale scale ranging from 0-10; 0 being "no pain" to 10 "the worst pain imaginable".

Time frame:
Hospital days 1-7, day of discharge (an average of 1 week) and at 2, 4 and 8 weeks following discharge from hospital.
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Numeric Pain Score
score on a scaleOperativeNon-operative
Hospital day 17.5 ± 2.47 ± 2.3
Hospital day 26.3 ± 2.66.0 ± 2.4
Hospital day 35.3 ± 2.85.9 ± 2.1
Hospital day 45.3 ± 2.86.1 ± 2.4
Hospital day 55.0 ± 2.35.9 ± 2
Hospital day 64.7 ± 2.15.8 ± 2.1
Hospital day 74.7 ± 2.66.3 ± 2.3
Day of discharge4.1 ± 2.35.2 ± 2.4
2 week follow-up2.9 ± 2.14.5 ± 2.2
4 week follow-up2.4 ± 2.43.3 ± 2.6
8 week follow-up1.5 ± 1.33.3 ± 2.7
SecondaryLength of Stay

Patient length of stay in hospital and/or ICU.

Time frame:
2 months after injury
Reported as:
Median · Days
Length of Stay
DaysOperativeNon-operative
Hospital length of stay7 (5.5 to 10)6 (4 to 11)
ICU length of stay2 (0 to 3)2 (0 to 3)
SecondaryDaily Narcotic Use

Total standardized narcotic equivalents per day, which is calculated using an equil-analgesic scale: Narcotic Dose Unit Route Hydromorphone 1.5 mg IV Hydromorphone 7.5 mg PO Fentanyl 100 mcg IV Morphine 10 mg IV Morphine 30 mg PO Oxycodone 20 mg PO Hydrocodone 30 mg PO \*IV, intravenous; mcg, micrograms; mg, milligrams; PO, per oral

Time frame:
Inpatient: occurred daily at 10 AM while the patient was hospitalized. Post-discharge: occurred at outpatient clinic follow-up encounter that occurred at 2, 4, and 8 weeks post discharge.
Reported as:
Median · mg morphine equivalents
Daily Narcotic Use
mg morphine equivalentsOperativeNon-operative
Hospital Day 12.6 (1.3 to 4.5)1.6 (0.5 to 2.6)
Hospital Day 22.0 (0.8 to 3.3)2.0 (1.3 to 2.8)
Hospital Day 31.5 (0.8 to 3)1.6 (1 to 2.3)
Hospital Day 41.5 (0.5 to 3)1.5 (0.8 to 2.7)
Hospital Day 51.3 (0.6 to 2.3)2.3 (1 to 3)
Hospital Day 61.3 (0.3 to 2.3)2.0 (1 to 3.5)
Hospital Day 71.0 (0.5 to 2)2.3 (0.8 to 3.8)
Day of Discharge0.5 (0.3 to 1.5)0.8 (0.5 to 1.5)
2 Week Follow-up0.5 (0 to 1.3)1.2 (0.8 to 3)
4 Week Follow-up0.3 (0 to 0.6)1.5 (0 to 2)
8 Week Follow-up0.2 (0 to 0.5)0.5 (0.3 to 1.3)
SecondaryIncentive Spirometry

The maximum volume (ml) of inspired air through a handheld device called an incentive spirometer. Best value of 3 attempts is recorded. The value of the inspired volume is normalized for patients age, sex, and height and in measured in the percent predicted for that particular individual.

Time frame:
Inpatient: occurred daily at 10 AM while the patient was hospitalized. Post-discharge: occurred at outpatient clinic follow-up encounter that occurred at 2, 4, and 8 weeks post discharge.
Reported as:
Median · % of predicted ml for age/sex/height
Incentive Spirometry
% of predicted ml for age/sex/heightOperativeNon-operative
Hosp Day 139 (21 to 61)39.5 (27.5 to 49.5)
Hosp Day 240 (23 to 59)41.5 (32 to 60)
Hosp Day 346 (31 to 65)49 (42 to 64)
Hosp Day 448.5 (33.5 to 67.5)49.5 (42 to 66)
Hosp Day 559 (37 to 66)51 (42 to 59)
Hosp Day 652 (41 to 67)49 (41.5 to 60)
Hosp Day 755 (45 to 72)54 (37 to 70)
Day of Discharge63 (55 to 78)61 (49 to 74)
2 Week Follow-Up87 (63 to 100)90 (73 to 100)
4 Week Follow-Up100 (68 to 112)100 (85 to 113)
8 Week Follow-Up100 (81 to 120.5)97.5 (77 to 141)
SecondaryPulmonary Function Testing

Forced expired volume in 1 second, measured in pulmonary function lab

Time frame:
once, at first follow-up, outpatient, clinic visit, which occurred at 2 weeks post discharge.
Reported as:
Mean · % of predicted ml for age/sex/height
Pulmonary Function Testing
% of predicted ml for age/sex/heightOperativeNon-operative
Pulmonary Function Testing75.5 ± 17.675.8 ± 15.8
SecondaryNumber of Patients With Pneumonia

CDC definition of nosocomial pneumonia

Time frame:
Study participants were followed up to 2 months after index admission date.
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Patients With Pneumonia
ParticipantsOperativeNon-operative
Number of Patients With Pneumonia14
SecondaryDays of Ventilator-dependent Respiratory Failure

Mechanical ventilation for \> 24 hours at any time during index hospitalization

Time frame:
Study participants were followed up to 2 months after index admission date.
Reported as:
Median · Days
Days of Ventilator-dependent Respiratory Failure
DaysOperativeNon-operative
Days of Ventilator-dependent Respiratory Failure0 (0 to 0)0 (0 to 0)
SecondaryChest Wall Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire

An 8 question, validated quality of life (QoL) questionnaire administered at outpatient, clinic follow-up encounters after discharge from the index admission. Minimum score is 0 and indicates the worst outcome of QoL while maximum score is 55, which indicates the highest outcome of QoL.

Time frame:
2, 4 and 8 weeks after discharge from the index admission
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Chest Wall Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire
units on a scaleOperativeNon-operative
2 Week Follow-Up20.6 ± 1125.3 ± 10.1
4 Week Follow-Up16.9 ± 10.622.4 ± 8.8
8 Week Follow-Up10.4 ± 10.915.7 ± 8.2

Adverse events

Collected over 2 months after study participant was discharged from index admission.. Non-serious events are listed at a 1% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Operative0/51 (0%)0/51 (0%)1/51 (2%)
Non-operative0/59 (0%)0/59 (0%)3/59 (5.1%)
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventOperativeNon-operative
Take back to operating room for bleedingRespiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders1/510/59
Local InfectionRespiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders0/511/59
Systemic InfectionImmune system disorders0/511/59
Acute Kidney InjuryRenal and urinary disorders0/511/59

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)OperativeNon-OperativeTotal
Mean54.6 ± 15.453.2 ± 16.153.6 ± 15.2
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)OperativeNon-OperativeTotal
Female121628
Male394382
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected(Participants)OperativeNon-OperativeTotal
Count of participants——0
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)OperativeNon-OperativeTotal
United States5159110
07

Study locations

1 site
  • Denver Health Medical Center
    Denver, Colorado 80204, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Pieracci FM, Majercik S, Ali-Osman F, Ang D, Doben A, Edwards JG, French B, Gasparri M, Marasco S, Minshall C, Sarani B, Tisol W, VanBoerum DH, White TW. Consensus statement: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures rib fracture colloquium clinical practice guidelines. Injury. 2017 Feb;48(2):307-321. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2016.11.026. Epub 2016 Nov 27. No abstract available. PubMed 27912931 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Dec 14, 2018
  • Informed consent form · Apr 5, 2019

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03221595
Lead sponsor
Denver Health and Hospital Authority
Collaborators
DePuy Synthes
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jul 18, 2017
Start date
Jan 2, 2018
Primary completion
Oct 22, 2019
Completion
Jan 1, 2020
Results posted
Apr 5, 2021
Last update
May 6, 2021

Study contacts

Fredric M Pieracci, MD MPH
principal investigator · Denver Health Medical Center

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion