Skip to main content

Table 1 Comparison of the demographic data and fracture distribution between patients with an isolated pelvic fracture (group A) and a combined abdominal/pelvic injury (group B)

From: Associated abdominal injuries do not influence quality of care in pelvic fractures—a multicenter cohort study from the German Pelvic Registry

 

Group A

Group B

p value

Number (n)

8.151

3.537

 

Age (years)

70.5 ± 20.4 [4–105]

47.3 ± 22.0 [12–92]

< 0.001 #

Gender

  

< 0.001 *

Male (n)

35.5% (2.893)

62.1% (2.195)

 

Female (n)

65.5% (5.258)

37.9% (1.342)

 

ISS

9 (5)

26 (17)

< 0.001 §

Type of pelvic fracture

  

0.28

Pelvic ring fracture

73.1% (5.956)

74.9% (2.650)

 

Acetabular fracture

23.3% (1.898)

11.2% (397)

 

Combined pelvic ring + acetabular fracture

3.6% (297)

13.9% (490)

 

Type of pelvic ring fracture

  

< 0.001 *

Stable (Tile A)

44.8% (2.669)

20.0% (530)

 

Unstable (Tile B/C)

55.2% (3.287)

80.0% (2.120)

 
  1. ISS, Injury Severity Score
  2. The data of the ISS are given as median and IQR.
  3. *Mann-Whitney U test (isolated pelvic fracture vs. combined injury)
  4. §Median-test (isolated pelvic fracture vs. combined injury)
  5. #Student’s t test (isolated pelvic fracture vs. combined injury)