Spontaneous Retroperitoneal Haemorrhage: Efficacy of Conservative Management and Embolisation.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of conservative management and embolisation in patients with spontaneous retroperitoneal haemorrhage. METHODS: Single-centre retrospective case-control study of patients with spontaneous retroperitoneal haemorrhage treated conservatively or with embolisation. Patients aged ≥ 18 years were identified from CT imaging reports stating a diagnosis of retroperitoneal haemorrhage or similar and images reviewed for confirmation. Exclusion criteria included recent trauma, surgery, retroperitoneal vascular line insertion, or other non-spontaneous aetiology. Datapoints analysed included treatment approach (conservative or embolisation), technical success, clinical success, and mortality outcome. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients met inclusion criteria, who were predominantly anticoagulated (74%), male (72%), older adults (mean age 69 years), with active haemorrhage on CT (52%). Overall mortality was 15%. Clinical success was more likely with conservative management (36/38) than embolisation (9/16; p < 0.01), and all-cause (1/38 vs 7/16; p < 0.01) and uncontrolled primary bleeding (1/38 vs 5/16; p < 0.01) mortality were higher with embolisation. However, embolised patients more commonly had active bleeding on CT (15/38 vs 13/16; p < 0.01), shock (5/38 vs 6/16; p < 0.04), and higher blood transfusion volumes (mean 2.2 vs 5.9 units; p < 0.01). After one-to-one propensity score matching, differences in clinical success (p = 0.04) and all-cause mortality (p = 0.01) remained; however, difference in uncontrolled primary bleeding mortality did not (p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Conservative management of SRH is likely to be effective in most patients, even in those who are anticoagulated and haemodynamically unstable, with variable success seen after embolisation in a more unstable patient group, supporting the notion that resuscitation and optimisation of coagulation are the most vital components of treatment.

Diagnostic accuracy of a commercially available deep-learning algorithm in supine chest radiographs following trauma.

OBJECTIVES: Trauma chest radiographs may contain subtle and time-critical pathology. Artificial intelligence (AI) may aid in accurate reporting, timely identification and worklist prioritisation. However, few AI programs have been externally validated. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of a commercially available deep convolutional neural network - Annalise CXR V1.2 (Annalise.ai) - for detection of traumatic injuries on supine chest radiographs. METHODS: Chest radiographs with a CT performed within 24 h in the setting of trauma were retrospectively identified at a level one adult trauma centre between January 2009 and June 2019. Annalise.ai assessment of the chest radiograph was compared to the radiologist report of the chest radiograph. Contemporaneous CT report was taken as the ground truth. Agreement with CT was measured using Cohen's κ and sensitivity/specificity for both AI and radiologists were calculated. RESULTS: There were 1404 cases identified with a median age of 52 (IQR 33-69) years, 949 males. AI demonstrated superior performance compared to radiologists in identifying pneumothorax (p = 0.007) and segmental collapse (p = 0.012) on chest radiograph. Radiologists performed better than AI for clavicle fracture (p = 0.002), humerus fracture (p < 0.0015) and scapula fracture (p = 0.014). No statistical difference was found for identification of rib fractures and pneumomediastinum. CONCLUSION: The evaluated AI performed comparably to radiologists in interpreting chest radiographs. Further evaluation of this AI program has the potential to enable it to be safely incorporated in clinical processes. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Clinically useful AI programs represent promising decision support tools.

Major haemorrhage fatalities in the Australian national coronial database.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to describe the epidemiology of major bleeding fatalities. METHODS: A case series analysis of Australia's National Coronial Information System was conducted. Keywords were used to search for closed cases of major haemorrhage in the state of Victoria for the period 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2011. Coroners' findings, autopsy reports and police reports of cases were reviewed. Demographic data were extracted, and cases were assigned to a clinical bleeding context. RESULTS: A total of 427 cases of major bleeding causing death were identified. The cohort was predominately men (69%), with a median age of 63 years (interquartile range 45-77 years). Trauma accounted for 38%, gastrointestinal haemorrhage 28%, surgical/procedural bleeding 14%, ruptured/leaking aneurysms 12% and other 8%. Most events began in homes (46%), hospitals (22%) and at the roadside (17%). Of those whose haemorrhage began in the community, 69% did not survive to hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Major bleeding fatalities occurred across a diverse range of contexts, with trauma and gastrointestinal bleeding accounting for most deaths. The majority of patients did not survive to reach hospital. Major haemorrhage occurring entirely outside hospital may be underrecognised from analyses of datasets based primarily on traumatic or in-hospital bleeding. These findings have implications for management of pre-hospital resuscitation and development of clinical practice guidelines for identification and management of major bleeding in the community.

Attitudes of Lay People to Withdrawal of Treatment in Brain Damaged Patients.

BACKGROUND: Whether patients in the vegetative state (VS), minimally conscious state (MCS) or the clinically related locked-in syndrome (LIS) should be kept alive is a matter of intense controversy. This study aimed to examine the moral attitudes of lay people to these questions, and the values and other factors that underlie these attitudes. METHOD: One hundred ninety-nine US residents completed a survey using the online platform Mechanical Turk, comprising demographic questions, agreement with treatment withdrawal from each of the conditions, agreement with a series of ethical principles and three personality tests. RESULTS: More supported treatment withdrawal from VS (40.2 % agreed, 17.6 % disagreed) than MCS (20.6 %, 41.2 %) or LIS (25.3 %, 35.8 %). Agreement with treatment withdrawal was negatively correlated with religiosity (r = -0.272, P < 0.001), though showed no significant relationship with need for cognition or empathy, and only a partial association with utilitarian judgment in a standard moral dilemma. Support for treatment withdrawal was most strongly associated with endorsement of the importance of patient autonomy, dignity, suffering, best interests. Distributive justice was not given significant weight by most. Importantly, agreement with treatment withdrawal was noticeably higher when considered from a first as opposed to third person perspective for VS (Z = -6.056, P < 0.001), MCS (Z = -6.746, P < 0.001) and LIS (Z = -6.681, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Lay attitudes to withdrawal of treatment in brain damaged patients are largely shaped by values similar to those central to the secular ethical debate. Neither traditional values such as the sanctity of life nor utilitarian values relating to resource allocation seem to play a central role. Far greater weight is given to autonomy, which may explain why participants were far more willing to endorse withdrawal of treatment when the issue was presented in the first person, or in relation to a concrete case involving a patient's explicit wishes. Surveys focusing on abstract cases presented in the third person may not provide an accurate picture of lay attitudes to these critical ethical questions.