The goal of this prospective, randomized study is to learn about the effects of two different surgical techniques for treating unstable chest wall injuries in adults. The main questions it aims to answer are: Does fixing two fractures per rib lead to better healing than fixing one fracture per rib in patients with unstable chest injuries? Does the choice of surgical method affect lung function, pain, other symptoms, risk of pneumonia, or the risk of complications? Participants will: * Undergo surgery using either the standard method (fixing one fracture per rib) or an alternative method (fixing two fractures per rib), both using a muscle-sparing technique. * Be followed up at 1, 3, and 12 months after surgery. * Have CT scans at 3 months (and at 12 months if healing is incomplete) to assess bone healing. * Be evaluated for lung function, pain, symptoms, and complications. This study aims to provide new knowledge about which surgical method is best for unstable chest wall injuries, helping to improve treatment and recovery for these patients.
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Radiological healing
Timeframe: 3 months after inclusion, 12 months after inclusion if not healed after 3 months.