Abstract
Background/Objectives: Orthopaedic trauma management in polytrauma patients presents challenges, particularly in selecting between damage control orthopaedics (DCO) and early appropriate care (EAC). This systematic review evaluates these approaches and explores the role of biomarkers in optimising surgical timing. The primary objective of this review was to evaluate the potential clinical utility of biomarkers in guiding surgical timing and predicting perioperative complications. The secondary objective was to compare the effectiveness of DCO and EAC approaches, focusing on their impact on patient outcomes when controlled for Injury Severity Scores (ISSs). Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar identified studies focusing on fracture management (DCO versus EAC), timing protocols, and biomarkers in polytrauma patients. Twenty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Results: Among the 27 studies, 12 evaluated biomarkers and 15 compared DCO and EAC. Point-of-care (POC) biomarkers, including lactate (p < 0.001; OR 1.305), monocyte L-selectin (p = 0.001; OR 1.5), and neutrophil L-selectin (p = 0.005; OR 1.56), demonstrated predictive value for sepsis, infection, and morbidity. CD16bright/CD62Ldim neutrophils were significant predictors of infection (p = 0.002). Advanced biomarkers, such as IL-6, IL-10, RNA IL-7R, HMGB1, and leptin offered prognostic insights but required longer processing times. No clear superiority was identified between DCO and EAC, with comparable outcomes when injury severity scores (ISS) were controlled. Conclusions: This systematic review highlights the challenge of translating biomarker research into clinical practice, identifying several point-of-care and advanced laboratory biomarkers with significant potential to predict complications like sepsis, infection, and MODS. Future efforts should focus on refining biomarker thresholds, advancing point-of-care technologies, and validating their role in improving surgical timing and trauma care outcomes.