The management of flail chest. A comparison of ventilatory and nonventilatory treatment

Retrospective analysis of forty-two consecutive patients with flail chest injuries admitted to the Trauma Research Unit of the Naval Regional Medical Center, San Deigo from June 1972 to July 1975 compared ventilatory and nonventilatory management. The actual need for ventilatory support in these patients was determined by analyzing their records for evidence of significant pulmonary dysfunction. This allowed division of patients into three groups: "appropriately" ventilated; "inappropriately" ventilated; and nonventilated. Admission PO2 in the "appropriately" ventilated patients was significantly lower than in the other two groups because the former were admitted with respiratory distress and hypoxemia. Significantly more complications occurred in the ventilated groups than in the nonventilated. Treatment-associated complications were more frequent in the ventilated groups. Because of these findings, we belive that mechanical ventilation should be used in the treatment of flail chest injuries only for significant pulmonary dysfunction and not for the purpose of stabilizing the chest wall. If respiratory support is required, it should be discontinued when normal gas exchange has been restored.