RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: We seek to describe the current practice pattern use of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) and fibrinogen concentrate (FC) in trauma patients. BACKGROUND: Trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) and endotheliopathy of trauma (EOT) contribute significantly to mortality from traumatic haemorrhage. FC, and 4-factor PCC are potential treatments for EOT and TIC, respectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We obtained data from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) registry and identified patients who received either PCC or FC using procedural codes. We used descriptive statistics to characterise practice patterns of these products. RESULTS: There were 6 714 002 total encounters within the TQIP from 2017 to 2022, of which 10 589 received PCC and 3009 received FC. Of the recipients, there were 35 that received both products. There were 44 that received both. The median age of PCC recipients was 77 (69-84) with 19 patients <15 years of age with the youngest being 2 years of age. There was a general upward trend in the number of facilities with documented use of PCC: 155/744, 168/766, 189/764, 206/780, 234/795, and 235/816, respectively. The median age of FC recipients was 57 (32-75) with 48 patients <15 years of age with the youngest being 1 year of age. There was a minor downward trend in the number of facilities that had documented use of FC: 55, 44, 39, 32, 38 and 40. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of PCC and FC remains uncommon, although there appears to be an upward trend of PCC use. Most PCC use appeared to be for anticoagulation reversal in the setting of head trauma. Data guiding the use of these products are necessary as these products become more recognised as adjuncts to traumatic haemorrhage control.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Prone position ventilation is a potentially life-saving ancillary intervention but is not widely adopted for coronavirus disease 2019 or acute respiratory distress syndrome from other causes. Implementation of lung-protective ventilation including prone positioning for coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome is limited by isolation precautions and personal protective equipment scarcity. We sought to determine the safety and associated clinical outcomes for coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome treated with prolonged prone position ventilation without daily repositioning. DESIGN: Retrospective single-center study. SETTING: Community academic medical ICU. PATIENTS: Sequential mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: Lung-protective ventilation and prolonged protocolized prone position ventilation without daily supine repositioning. Supine repositioning was performed only when Fio2 less than 60% with positive end-expiratory pressure less than 10 cm H2O for greater than or equal to 4 hours. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary safety outcome: proportion with pressure wounds by Grades (0-4). Secondary outcomes: hospital survival, length of stay, rates of facial and limb edema, hospital-acquired infections, device displacement, and measures of lung mechanics and oxygenation. Eighty-seven coronavirus disease 2019 patients were mechanically ventilated. Sixty-one were treated with prone position ventilation, whereas 26 did not meet criteria. Forty-two survived (68.9%). Median (interquartile range) time from intubation to prone position ventilation was 0.28 d (0.11-0.80 d). Total prone position ventilation duration was 4.87 d (2.08-9.97 d). Prone position ventilation was applied for 30.3% (18.2-42.2%) of the first 28 days. Pao2:Fio2 diverged significantly by day 3 between survivors 147 (108-164) and nonsurvivors 107 (85-146), mean difference -9.632 (95% CI, -48.3 to 0.0; p = 0·05). Age, driving pressure, day 1, and day 3 Pao2:Fio2 were predictive of time to death. Thirty-eight (71.7%) developed ventral pressure wounds that were associated with prone position ventilation duration and day 3 Sequential Organ Failure Assessment. Limb weakness occurred in 58 (95.1%) with brachial plexus palsies in five (8.2%). Hospital-acquired infections other than central line-associated blood stream infections were infrequent. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged prone position ventilation was feasible and relatively safe with implications for wider adoption in treating critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients and acute respiratory distress syndrome of other etiologies.
