Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 16603016

Fat embolism.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To review the pathophysiology and management of patients with clinical manifestations of fat embolism. DATA SOURCES: A review of studies reported from 1976 to 1998 and identified through a MEDLINE search of the literature on fat embolism and fat embolism syndrome. SUMMARY OF REVIEW: Fat embolism occurs when bony or soft tissue trauma has caused fat to enter the circulation, or in atraumatic disorders where circulating fat particles have coalesced abnormally within the circulation. The fat particles deposit in the pulmonary and systemic circulations, although only 1 - 2% develop a clinical disorder with respiratory, cerebral and dermal manifestations known as the fat embolism syndrome. Rarely, fat embolism produces a fulminant fat embolism syndrome due to mechanical obstruction within the pulmonary circulation causing a severe right heart failure. The fat embolism syndrome is believed to be caused by the toxic effects of free fatty acids liberated at the endothelial layer which cause capillary disruption, perivascular haemorrhage and oedema. The clinical manifestations of respiratory failure, petechiae and a diffuse or focal cerebral disturbance, are characteristic but not pathognomonic of the syndrome. The syndrome is largely self limiting with treatment being symptomatic. Therapy is directed at maintaining respiratory function and largely follows the same principles of management used in patients who have the acute respiratory distress syndrome. Early immobilization of fractures and methods to reduce the intramedullary pressure during total hip arthroplasty have reduced the incidence of operative fat embolisation. Corticosteroids either before or after the development of respiratory or cerebral symptoms have not been shown to be of any benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Fat embolism occurs in many traumatic and atraumatic conditions and is largely asymptomatic. Preventative measures include early immobilization of fractures and methods to reduce intramedullary pressure during surgical manoeuvres. Treatment is largely symptomatic with therapy for respiratory failure similar to that used in management of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Corticosteroids have not been found to be of significant benefit.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Glover, L I Worthley. 1999. Fat embolism.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16603016/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗