Survival benefits of interventional radiology and surgical teams collaboration during primary trauma surveys: a single-centre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A team approach is essential for effective trauma management. Close collaboration between interventional radiologists and surgeons during the initial management of trauma patients is important for prompt and accurate trauma care. This study aimed to determine whether trauma patients benefit from close collaboration between interventional radiology (IR) and surgical teams during the primary trauma survey. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted between 2014 and 2021 at a single institution. Patients were assigned to an embolization group (EG), a surgery group (SG), or a combination group (CG) according to their treatment. The primary and secondary outcomes were survival at hospital discharge compared with the probability of survival (Ps) and the time course of treatment. RESULTS: The analysis included 197 patients, consisting of 135 men and 62 women, with a median age of 56 [IQR, 38-72] years and an injury severity score of 20 [10-29]. The EG, SG, and CG included 114, 48, and 35 patients, respectively. Differences in organ injury patterns were observed between the three groups. In-hospital survival rates in all three groups were higher than the Ps. In particular, the survival rate in the CG was 15.5% higher than the Ps (95% CI: 7.5-23.6%; p < 0.001). In the CG, the median time for starting the initial procedure was 53 [37-79] min and the procedure times for IR and surgery were 48 [29-72] min and 63 [35-94] min, respectively. Those times were significantly shorter among three groups. CONCLUSION: Close collaboration between IR and surgical teams, including the primary survey, improves the survival of severe trauma patients who require both IR procedures and surgeries by improving appropriate treatment selection and reducing the time process.

The effect of participation of interventional radiology team in a primary trauma survey on patient outcome.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the survival benefits of a workflow in which an interventional radiology (IR) team participates in a primary trauma survey on patients with hemodynamically unstable trauma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted between 2012 and 2019 at a single institution. Patients who underwent an IR procedure as the initial hemostasis were assigned to the hemodynamically stable group (HSG) or hemodynamically unstable group (HUG). The primary and secondary outcomes were survival at hospital discharge compared with the probability of survival (Ps) and the time course. RESULTS: A total of 160 patients (100 men, 60 women; median age, 57.5 years [interquartile range (IQR): 31.5-72 years]) with an injury severity score of 24 (IQR: 13.75-34) were included. A total of 125 patients were included in the HSG group and 35 patients in the HUG group. The observational survival rate was significantly greater than the Ps rate by 4.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-8.4%; P = 0.005) in HSG and by 24.6% in HUG (95% CI: 16.9-32.3%; P < 0.001). The observational survival rate was significantly greater than Ps in HUG than in HSG (P < 0.001). The median time to initiate IR procedures and the median procedure time in HUG were 54 min [IQR: 45-66 min] and 48 min [IQR: 30-85 min], respectively; both were significantly shorter than those in the HSG. CONCLUSION: A trauma workflow utilizing an IR team in a primary survey is associated with improved survival of patients with hemodynamically unstable trauma when compared with Ps with a shorter time course.