Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

PREGNANCY AFTER SURGERY FOR PELVIC FRACTURES: PATIENT FEARS & OUTCOMES



Abstract

To investigate the fears of female patients of child bearing age, who required surgical stabilisation for pelvic fractures, and to assess the outcomes of subsequent pregnancy. Between 1990 & 2002 from a prospectively kept database in our institution, patients sustaining pelvic fractures requiring surgery who were women under 35 years of age at the time of injury were identified and included in this study. Patient’s medical records and radiographs (birth canal status) were reviewed and data collected.

All the patients were attempted to be contacted by telephone and a questionnaire completed recording the type of pelvic injury, previous obstetric history, fears regarding future pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, Euroqol pain scores pre & post fracture and painkiller usage. Those who were unable to be contacted by telephone, were followed up by a postal questionnaire. The mean time of follow up from injury was 4.2 years (range 1 to 12 years). Out of 554 patients, 197 (36%) were women and of these, 54 (27%) patients were less than 35 years old at the time of injury. A telephone questionnaire was completed on 31 patients [57 % (study group)], results from the postal questionnaire are being collated. The mean age of the study group at injury was 23.3 years (range 6 to 34 years). There were 14 (45 %) isolated ace-tabular fractures and 17 (55 %) pelvic ring fractures. 11 (36 %) had previously had children prior to the injury, and 22 (71 %) had planned to have children in the future, prior to fracture. 23 (74 %) had expressed fears related to their future ability to have children.

Out of 8 (26 %) patients who had subsequent pregnancies, only 1 (12.5%) had a normal vaginal delivery. Out of the rest, 3 (37.5%) patients had investigations for pelvic disproportion; 2 (20%) went on to elective caesarean section for disproportion; 1 patient requested an elective section after concerns regarding delivery; 1 patient had a ventouse assisted delivery for delayed second stage; 1 patient had an ectopic pregnancy; 1 patient had a miscarriage at 18 weeks gestation and 1 patient had infertility problems. 4 out of 31 (13%) patients were advised against future pregnancy and one patient underwent a tubal ligation following this advice. Pelvic fractures represent a serious group of injuries; after initial recovery, many female patients have serious concerns regarding future pregnancy. A number will go on to have further pregnancies, and many will suffer the risk of complications following their pelvic injury.

The abstracts were prepared by Mr Richard Buxton. Correspondence should be addressed to him at Bankton Cottage, 21 Bankton Park, Kingskettle, Cupar, Fife KY15 7PY, United Kingdom