RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Hemorrhage is a major cause of preventable trauma deaths, and the ABC approach is widely used during the primary survey. We hypothesize that prioritizing circulation over intubation (CAB) can improve outcomes in patients with exsanguinating injuries. METHODS: A prospective observational study involving international trauma centers was conducted. Patients with systolic blood pressure below 90 who were intubated within 30 min of arrival were included. Prioritizing circulation (CAB) was defined as delaying intubation until blood products were started, and/or bleeding control was performed before securing the airway. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: The study included 278 eligible patients, with 61.5% falling within the "CAB" cohort and 38.5% in the "ABC" cohort. Demographic and disease characteristics, including age, sex, ISS, use of blood products, and other relevant factors, exhibited comparable distributions between the two cohorts. The CAB group had a higher proportion of penetrating injuries and more patients receiving intubation in the operating room. Notably, patients in the CAB group demonstrated higher GCS scores, lower SBP values before intubation but higher after intubation, and a significantly lower incidence of cardiac arrest and post-intubation hypotension. Key outcomes revealed significantly lower 24-hour mortality in the CAB group (11.1% vs. 69.2%), a lower rate of renal failure, and a higher rate of ARDS. Multivariable logistic regression models showed a 91% reduction in the odds of mortality within 24 h and an 89% reduction at 30 days for the CAB cohort compared to the ABC cohort. These findings suggest that prioritizing circulation before intubation is associated with improved outcomes in patients with exsanguinating injuries. CONCLUSION: Post-intubation hypotension is observed to be correlated with worse outcomes. The consideration of prioritizing circulation over intubation in patients with exsanguinating injuries, allowing for resuscitation, or bleeding control, appears to be associated with potential improvements in survival. Emphasizing the importance of circulation and resuscitation is crucial, and this approach might offer benefits for various bleeding-related conditions.
Assuntos
Exsanguinação , Intubação Intratraqueal , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Estudos Prospectivos , Adulto , Exsanguinação/etiologia , Intubação Intratraqueal/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ferimentos e Lesões/cirurgia , Ferimentos e Lesões/complicações , Centros de Traumatologia , Escala de Gravidade do FerimentoRESUMO
Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has been utilized by trauma surgeons at the bedside for over a decade in both civilian and military settings. Both translational and clinical research suggest it is superior to resuscitative thoracotomy for specific patient populations. Technological advancements in recent years have significantly enhanced the safety profile of REBOA. Resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta has also swiftly found implementation in patients in shock from non-traumatic hemorrhage.
Assuntos
Oclusão com Balão , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Choque Hemorrágico , Humanos , Aorta/lesões , Choque Hemorrágico/etiologia , Choque Hemorrágico/terapia , RessuscitaçãoRESUMO
Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has become part of the arsenal to temporize patients in shock from severe hemorrhage. REBOA is used in trauma to prevent cardiovascular collapse by preserving heart and brain perfusion and minimizing distal hemorrhage until definitive hemorrhage control can be achieved. Significant side effects, including death, ischemia and reperfusion injuries, severe renal and lung damage, limb ischemia and amputations have all been reported. The aim of this article is to provide an update on complications related to REBOA. REBOA has emerged as a critical intervention for managing severe hemorrhagic shock, aiming to temporize patients and prevent cardiovascular collapse until definitive hemorrhage control can be achieved. However, this life-saving procedure is not without its challenges, with significant reported side effects. This review provides an updated overview of complications associated with REBOA. The most prevalent procedure-related complication is distal embolization and lower limb ischemia, with an incidence of 16% (range: 4-52.6%). Vascular and access site complications are also noteworthy, documented in studies with incidence rates varying from 1.2% to 11.1%. Conversely, bleeding-related complications exhibit lower documentation, with incidence rates ranging from 1.4% to 28.6%. Pseudoaneurysms are less likely, with rates ranging from 2% to 14%. A notable incidence of complications arises from lower limb compartment syndrome and lower limb amputation associated with the REBOA procedure. Systemic complications include acute kidney failure, consistently reported across various studies, with incidence rates ranging from 5.6% to 46%, representing one of the most frequently documented systemic complications. Infection and sepsis are also described, with rates ranging from 2% to 36%. Pulmonary-related complications, including acute respiratory distress syndrome and multisystem organ failure, occur in this population at rates ranging from 7.1% to 17.5%. This comprehensive overview underscores the diverse spectrum of complications associated with REBOA.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has the potential to cause clinically relevant systemic ischemic burden with long durations of aortic occlusion (AO). We aimed to examine the association between balloon occlusion time and clinical complications and mortality outcomes in patients undergoing zone 1 REBOA. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acuteregistry patients with Zone 1 REBOA between 2013 and 2022 was performed. Patients with cardiopulmonary resuscitation on arrival or who did not survive past the emergency department were excluded. Total AO times were categorized as follows: <15 min, 15-30 min, 31-60 min, and >60 min. Clinical and procedural variables and in-hospital outcomes were compared across groups using bivariate and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: There were 327 cases meeting inclusion criteria (n = 51 < 15 min, 83 15-30 min, 98 31-60 min, and 95 > 60 min, respectively). AO >60 min had higher admission lactate (8 ± 6; P = 0.004) compared to all other time groups, but injury severity score, heart rate, and systolic blood pressure were similar. Group average times from admission to definitive hemorrhage control ranged from 82 to 103 min and were similar across groups (85 min in AO >60 group). Longer AO times were associated with greater red blood cell, fresh frozen plasma transfusions (P < 0.001), and vasopressor use (P = 0.001). Mortality was greatest in the >60 min group (73%) versus the <15 min, 15-30 min, and 31-60 min groups (53%, 43%, and 45%, P < 0.001). With adjustment for injury severity score, systolic blood pressure, and lactate, AO >60 min had greater mortality (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6-9.4; P < 0.001) than other AO duration groups. Among 153 survivors, AO >60 min had a higher rate of multiple organ failure (15.4%) compared to the other AO durations (0%, 0%, and 4%, P = 0.02). There were no differences in amputation rates (0.7%) or spinal cord ischemia (1.4%). acute kidney injury was seen in 41% of >60 min versus 21%, 27%, and 33%, P = 0.42. CONCLUSIONS: Though greater preocclusion physiologic injury may have been present, REBOA-induced ischemic insult was correlated with poor patient outcomes, specifically, REBOA inflation time >60 min had higher rates of mortality and multiple organ failure. Minimizing AO duration should be prioritized, and AO should not delay achieving definitive hemostasis. Partial REBOA may be a solution to extend safe AO time and deserves further study.
Assuntos
Oclusão com Balão , Reanimação Cardiopulmonar , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Choque Hemorrágico , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Insuficiência de Múltiplos Órgãos , Aorta/cirurgia , Ressuscitação , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Oclusão com Balão/efeitos adversos , Lactatos , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Choque Hemorrágico/etiologia , Choque Hemorrágico/terapiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Systolic blood pressure (SBP) is a potential indicator that could guide when to use a resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in trauma patients with life-threatening injuries. This study aims to determine the optimal SBP threshold for REBOA placement by analyzing the association between SBP pre-REBOA and 24-hour mortality in severely injured hemodynamically unstable trauma patients. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of the aortic balloon occlusion (ABO) trauma and AORTA registries. These databases record the details related to the use of REBOA and include data from 14 countries worldwide. We included patients who had suffered penetrating and/or blunt trauma. Patients who arrived at the hospital with a SBP pre-REBOA of 0 mm Hg and remained at 0 mm Hg after balloon inflation were excluded. We evaluated the impact that SBP pre-REBOA had on the probability of death in the first 24 hours. RESULTS: A total of 1,107 patients underwent endovascular aortic occlusion, of these, 848 met inclusion criteria. The median age was 44 years (interquartile range [IQR], 27-59 years) and 643 (76%) were male. The median injury severity score was 34 (IQR, 25-45). The median SBP pre-REBOA was 65 mm Hg (IQR, 49-88 mm Hg). Mortality at 24 hours was reported in 279 (32%) patients. Math modeling shows that predicted probabilities of the primary outcome increased steadily in SBP pre-REBOA below 100 mm Hg. Multivariable mixed-effects analysis shows that when SBP pre-REBOA was lower than 60 mm Hg, the risk of death was more than 50% (relative risk, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.92; p = 0.001). DISCUSSION: In patients who do not respond to initial resuscitation, the use of REBOA in SBPs between 60 mm Hg and 80 mm Hg may be a useful tool in resuscitation efforts before further decompensation or complete cardiovascular collapse. The findings from our study are clinically important as a first step in identifying candidates for REBOA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.
Assuntos
Arteriopatias Oclusivas , Oclusão com Balão , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Choque Hemorrágico , Humanos , Masculino , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Feminino , Pressão Sanguínea , Aorta/lesões , Choque Hemorrágico/terapia , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Ressuscitação , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The use of Zone 1 REBOA for life-threatening trauma has increased dramatically. STUDY DESIGN: The Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery database was queried for blunt and penetrating trauma between 2013 and 2021. Outcomes were examined both for mechanisms of injury combined and separately and for combinations of abdominal injury with and without traumatic brain injury and chest injuries (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] score >2). RESULTS: A total of 531 patients underwent REBOA (408 with blunt injury and 123 with penetrating injury) and 1,603 (595 with blunt injury and 1,008 with penetrating injury) underwent resuscitative thoracotomy (RT). Mean age was 38.5 ± 16 years and mean injury severity score was 34.5 ± 21; 57.7% had chest AIS score of more than 2, 21.8% had head AIS score of more than 2, and 37.3% had abdominal AIS score of more than 2. Admission Glasgow Coma Scale was 4.9 + 4, and systolic blood pressure at aortic occlusion (AO) was 22 + 40 mmHg. No differences in outcomes in REBOA or RT patients were identified between institutions (p > 0.5). After inverse probability weighting, Glasgow Coma Scale, age, injury severity score, systolic blood pressure at AO, CPR at AO, and blood product transfusion, REBOA was superior to RT in both blunt (odds ratio [OR] 4.7, 95% CI 1.9 to 11.7) and penetrating (OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.7 to 14) injuries, across all spectrums of injury (p < 0.01). Overall mortality was significantly higher for AO more than 90 minutes compared with less than 30 minutes in blunt (OR 4.6, 95% CI 1.5 to 15) and penetrating (OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 25) injuries. Duration of AO more than 60 minutes was significantly associated with mortality after penetrating abdominal injury (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.1 to 22) and abdomen and head (OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.6 to 18). CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital survival is higher for patients undergoing REBOA than RT for all injury patterns. Complete AO by REBOA or RT should be limited to less than 30 minutes. Neither hospital and procedure volume nor trauma verification level impacts outcomes for REBOA or RT.
Assuntos
Traumatismos Abdominais , Oclusão com Balão , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Choque Hemorrágico , Traumatismos Torácicos , Ferimentos não Penetrantes , Ferimentos Penetrantes , Humanos , Adulto Jovem , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Toracotomia/métodos , Ressuscitação/métodos , Traumatismos Torácicos/diagnóstico , Traumatismos Torácicos/cirurgia , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/cirurgia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/complicações , Traumatismos Abdominais/cirurgia , Traumatismos Abdominais/complicações , Ferimentos Penetrantes/cirurgia , Oclusão com Balão/métodos , Procedimentos Endovasculares/métodosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Tranexamic acid (TXA) use has been associated with thrombotic complications. OBJECTIVE: We aim to investigate outcomes associated with TXA use in the setting of high- (HP) and low-profile (LP) introducer sheaths for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA). PARTICIPANTS: The Aortic Occlusion and Resuscitation for Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (AORTA) database was queried for patients who underwent REBOA using a low-profile 7 French (LP) or high-profile, 11-14 French (HP) introducer sheaths between 2013 and 2022. Demographics, physiology, and outcomes were examined for patients who survived beyond the index operation. RESULTS: 574 patients underwent REBOA (503 LP, 71 HP); 77% were male, mean age was 44 ± 19 and mean injury severity score (ISS) was 35 ± 16. 212 patients received TXA (181 [36%] LP, 31 [43.7%] HP). There were no significant differences in admission vital signs, GCS, age, ISS, SBP at AO, CPR at AO, and duration of AO among LP and HP patients. Overall, mortality was significantly higher in the HP (67.6%) vs the LP group (54.9%; P = .043). Distal embolism was significantly higher in the HP group (20.4%) vs the LP group (3.9%; P < .001). Logistic regression demonstrated that TXA use was associated with a higher rate of distal embolism in both groups (OR = 2.92; P = .021). 2 LP patients (one who received TXA) required an amputation. CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo REBOA are profoundly injured and physiologically devastated. Tranexamic acid was associated with a higher rate of distal embolism in those who received REBOA, regardless of access sheath size. For patients receiving TXA, REBOA placement should be accompanied by strict protocols for immediate diagnosis and treatment of thrombotic complications.
Assuntos
Oclusão com Balão , Embolia , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Choque Hemorrágico , Ácido Tranexâmico , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Feminino , Ácido Tranexâmico/uso terapêutico , Aorta/cirurgia , Ressuscitação/métodos , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Oclusão com Balão/métodos , Embolia/etiologia , Procedimentos Endovasculares/métodos , Choque Hemorrágico/terapia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: California issued stay-at-home (SAH) orders to mitigate COVID-19 spread. Previous studies demonstrated a shift in mechanisms of injuries (MOIs) and decreased length of stay (LOS) for the general trauma population after SAH orders. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of SAH orders on geriatric trauma patients (GTPs), hypothesizing decreased motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) and LOS. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of GTPs (≥65 years old) from 11 level-I/II trauma centers was performed, stratifying patients into 3 groups: before SAH (1/1/2020-3/18/2020) (PRE), after SAH (3/19/2020-6/30/2020) (POST), and a historical control (3/19/2019-6/30/2019) (CONTROL). Bivariate comparisons were performed. RESULTS: 5486 GTPs were included (PRE-1756; POST-1706; CONTROL-2024). POST had a decreased rate of MVCs (7.6% vs 10.6%, P = .001; vs 11.9%, P < .001) and pedestrian struck (3.4% vs 5.8%, P = .001; vs 5.2%, P = .006) compared with PRE and CONTROL. Other mechanisms of injury, LOS, mortality, and operations performed were similar between cohorts. However, POST had a lower rate of discharge to skilled nursing facility (SNF) (20% vs 24.5%, P = .001; and 20% vs 24.4%, P = .001). CONCLUSION: This retrospective multicenter study demonstrated lower rates of MVCs and pedestrian struck for GTPs, which may be explained by decreased population movement as a result of SAH orders. Contrary to previous studies on the generalized adult population, no differences in other MOIs and LOS were observed after SAH orders. However, there was a lower rate of discharge to SNF, which may be related to a lack of resources due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and thus potentially negatively impacted recovery of GTPs.Keywords.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Adulto , Humanos , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , California/epidemiologia , Acidentes de Trânsito , Centros de Traumatologia , Tempo de InternaçãoRESUMO
Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta has been used by trauma surgeons at the bedside for more than a decade in civilian and military settings. Translational and clinical research suggests it is superior to resuscitative thoracotomy for select patients. Clinical research suggests outcomes are superior in patients who received resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta compared with those who did not. Technology has advanced considerably in the past several years, leading to the improved safety profile and wider adoption of resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta. In addition to trauma patients, resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta has been rapidly implemented for patient with nontraumatic hemorrhage.
Assuntos
Oclusão com Balão , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Humanos , Aorta/diagnóstico por imagem , Aorta/cirurgia , Hemorragia , Oclusão com Balão/efeitos adversos , Oclusão com Balão/métodos , Ressuscitação/efeitos adversos , Ressuscitação/métodos , Toracotomia , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Endovasculares/métodosRESUMO
ABSTRACT: Background: A 2021 report of the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery multicenter registry described the outcomes of patients treated with Zone 3 resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA zone 3). Our study builds upon that report, testing the hypothesis that REBOA zone 3 is associated with better outcomes than REBOA Zone 1 in the immediate treatment of severe, blunt pelvic injuries. Methods: We included adults who underwent aortic occlusion (AO) via REBOA zone 1 or REBOA Zone 3 in the emergency department for severe, blunt pelvic injuries [Abbreviated Injury Score ≥ 3 or pelvic packing/embolization/first 24 hours] in institutions with >10 REBOAs. Adjustment for confounders was accomplished with a Cox proportional hazards model for survival, generalized estimating equations for intensive care unit (ICU)-free days (IFD) and ventilation-free days (VFD) > 0 days, and mixed linear models for continuous outcomes (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS], Glasgow Outcome Scale [GOS]), accounting for facility clustering. Results: Of 109 eligible patients, 66 (60.6%) underwent REBOA Zone 3 and 43 (39.4%) REBOA Zone 1. There were no differences in demographics, but compared with REBOA Zone 3, REBOA Zone 1 patients were more likely to be admitted to high volume centers and be more severely injured. These patients did not differ in systolic blood pressure (SBP), cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the prehospital/hospital settings, SBP at the start of AO, time to AO start, likelihood of achieving hemodynamic stability or requirement of a second AO. After controlling for confounders, compared with REBOA Zone 3, REBOA Zone 1 was associated with a significantly higher mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.19), but there were no differences in VFD > 0 (adjusted relative risk, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.33-1.31), IFD > 0 (adjusted relative risk, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.39-1.57), discharge GCS (adjusted difference, -1.16; 95% CI, -4.2 to 1.90) or discharge GOS (adjusted difference, -0.67; 95% CI -1.9 to 0.63). Conclusions: This study suggests that compared with REBOA Zone 1, REBOA Zone 3 provides superior survival and is not inferior regarding other adverse outcomes in patients with severe blunt pelvic injuries.
Assuntos
Oclusão com Balão , Reanimação Cardiopulmonar , Choque Hemorrágico , Ferimentos não Penetrantes , Adulto , Humanos , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Aorta/cirurgia , Ressuscitação , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/terapia , Escala de Coma de Glasgow , Oclusão com Balão/efeitos adversos , Choque Hemorrágico/terapia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
Importance: Aortic occlusion (AO) is a lifesaving therapy for the treatment of severe traumatic hemorrhagic shock; however, there remains controversy whether AO should be accomplished via resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) or via endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in zone 1. Objective: To compare outcomes of AO via RT vs REBOA zone 1. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a comparative effectiveness research study using a multicenter registry of postinjury AO from October 2013 to September 2021. AO via REBOA zone 1 (above celiac artery) was compared with RT performed in the emergency department of facilities experienced in both procedures and documented in the prospective multicenter Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (AORTA) registry. Propensity score matching (PSM) with exact institution matching was used, in addition to subgroup multivariate analysis to control for confounders. The study setting included the ED, where AO via RT or REBOA was performed, and participants were adult trauma patients 16 years or older. Exposures: AO via REBOA zone 1 vs RT. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was survival. Secondary outcomes were ventilation-free days (VFDs), intensive care unit (ICU)-free days, discharge Glasgow Coma Scale score, and Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS). Results: A total of 991 patients (median [IQR] age, 32 [25-48] years; 808 male individuals [81.9%]) with a median (IQR) Injury Severity Score of 29 (18-50) were included. Of the total participants, 306 (30.9%) had AO via REBOA zone 1, and 685 (69.1%) had AO via RT. PSM selected 112 comparable patients (56 pairs). REBOA zone 1 was associated with a statistically significant lower mortality compared with RT (78.6% [44] vs 92.9% [52]; P = .03). There were no significant differences in VFD greater than 0 (REBOA, 18.5% [10] vs RT, 7.1% [4]; P = .07), ICU-free days greater than 0 (REBOA, 18.2% [10] vs RT, 7.1% [4]; P = .08), or discharge GOS of 5 or more (REBOA, 7.5% [4] vs RT, 3.6% [2]; P = .38). Multivariate analysis confirmed the survival benefit of REBOA zone 1 after adjustment for significant confounders (relative risk [RR], 1.25; 95% CI, 1.15-1.36). In all subgroup analyses (cardiopulmonary resuscitation on arrival, traumatic brain injury, chest injury, pelvic injury, blunt/penetrating mechanism, systolic blood pressure ≤60 mm Hg on AO initiation), REBOA zone 1 offered an either similar or superior survival. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this comparative effectiveness research suggest that REBOA zone 1 provided better or similar survival than RT for patients requiring AO postinjury. These findings provide the ethically necessary equipoise between these therapeutic approaches to allow the planning of a randomized controlled trial to establish the safety and effectiveness of REBOA zone 1 for AO in trauma resuscitation.
Assuntos
Doenças da Aorta , Oclusão com Balão , Reanimação Cardiopulmonar , Choque Hemorrágico , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Choque Hemorrágico/etiologia , Choque Hemorrágico/terapia , Estudos Prospectivos , Toracotomia , Empirismo , Aorta/fisiopatologia , Ressuscitação/métodos , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Doenças da Aorta/terapia , Oclusão com Balão/métodosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant cause of injury, and in pregnant patients (PIPV) poses a risk to both mother and fetus. Characteristics and outcomes for PIPV patients have not been well described. We hypothesize that PIPV patients have higher admission rates and mortality than non-IPV pregnant trauma (PT) patients and nonpregnant female IPV patients of childbearing age. We also hypothesize differences exist between PIPV and PT patient injury patterns, allowing for targeted IPV screening. STUDY DESIGN: The Nationwide Emergency Department Sample database was queried from 2010 to 2014 to identify IPV in adult women patients by injury code E967.3. Patients were compared in 2 ways, PIPV vs PT and PIPV vs nonpregnant female IPV patients. Demographics, injury mechanisms, and National Trauma Data Standard injury diagnoses were surveyed. Primary outcomes were hospital admissions and mortality. Logistic regression was used to estimate risk factors of the outcomes of hospitalization and IPV victimization in pregnant injured patients. RESULTS: There were 556 PIPV patients, 73,970 PT patients, and 56,543 nonpregnant female IPV patients. When comparing PIPV to PT, more PIPV patients had Medicaid coverage or were self-pay. Suffocation, head injuries, face/neck/scalp contusions, multiple contusions, and abrasions/friction burns were more prevalent in PIPV patients. Mortality and hospital admissions were scarce among all cohorts. Predictors of IPV victimization among injured pregnant patients include multiple injuries, head injuries, face/neck/scalp contusions, abrasions/friction burns, contusions of multiple sites, and those with Medicaid or self-pay coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Among injured pregnant patients, those with multiple injuries, head injuries, contusions of the face/neck/scalp, abrasions/friction burns, and multiple contusions should undergo IPV screening. Admissions and mortality are low; therefore, prevention measures should be implemented in the emergency department to reduce repeat victimization.
Assuntos
Queimaduras , Contusões , Traumatismos Craniocerebrais , Violência por Parceiro Íntimo , Traumatismo Múltiplo , Adulto , Gravidez , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
Single nucleus RNA-sequencing is critical in deciphering tissue heterogeneity and identifying rare populations. However, current high throughput techniques are not optimized for rare target populations and require tradeoffs in design due to feasibility. We provide a novel snRNA pipeline, MulipleXed Population Selection and Enrichment snRNA-sequencing (XPoSE-seq), to enable targeted snRNA-seq experiments and in-depth transcriptomic characterization of rare target populations while retaining individual sample identity.
RESUMO
COVID-19 stay-at-home (SAH) orders were impactful on adolescence, when social interactions affect development. This has the potential to change adolescent trauma. A post-hoc multicenter retrospective analysis of adolescent (13-17 years-old) trauma patients (ATPs) at 11 trauma centers was performed. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on injury date: historical control (CONTROL:3/19/2019-6/30/2019, before SAH (PRE:1/1/2020-3/18/2020), and after SAH (POST:3/19/2020-6/30/2020). The POST group was compared to both PRE and CONTROL groups in separate analyses. 726 ATPs were identified across the 3 time periods. POST had a similar penetrating trauma rate compared to both PRE (15.8% vs 13.8%, P = .56) and CONTROL (15.8% vs 14.5%, P = .69). POST also had a similar rate of suicide attempts compared to both PRE (1.2% vs 1.5%, P = .83) and CONTROL (1.2% vs 2.1%, P = .43). However, POST had a higher rate of drug positivity compared to CONTROL (28.6% vs 20.6%, P = .032), but was similar in all other comparisons of alcohol and drugs to PRE and POST periods (all P > .05). Hence ATPs were affected differently than adults and children, as they had a similar rate of penetrating trauma, suicide attempts, and alcohol positivity after SAH orders. However, they had increased drug positivity compared to the CONTROL, but not PRE group.
Assuntos
Experiências Adversas da Infância , COVID-19 , Ferimentos Penetrantes , Adolescente , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Criança , Humanos , Pandemias , Estudos Retrospectivos , Centros de TraumatologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) achieves temporary hemorrhage control via aortic occlusion. Existing REBOA literature focuses on blunt trauma without a clearly defined role in penetrating trauma. This study compared clinical/injury data and outcomes after REBOA in penetrating vs blunt trauma. STUDY DESIGN: All patients in the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (AORTA) database, an observational American Association for the Surgery of Trauma dataset of trauma patients requiring aortic occlusion, who underwent REBOA were included (January 2014 through February 2021). Study groups were defined by mechanism: penetrating vs blunt. Subgroup analysis was performed of patients arriving with vital signs. Univariable/multivariable analyses compared injuries and outcomes. RESULTS: Seven hundred fifty-nine patients underwent REBOA: 152 (20%) penetrating and 607 (80%) blunt. Patients undergoing penetrating REBOA were less severely injured (injury severity score 25 vs 34; p < 0.001). The most common hemorrhage source was abdominal in penetrating REBOA (79%) and pelvic in blunt REBOA (31%; p = 0.002). Penetrating REBOA was more likely to occur in the operating room (36% vs 17%) and less likely in the emergency department (63% vs 81%; p < 0.001). Penetrating REBOA used more zone I balloon deployment (76% vs 64%) and less zone III (19% vs 34%; p = 0.001). Improved or stabilized hemodynamics were less frequent after penetrating REBOA (41% vs 62%, p < 0.001; 23% vs 41%, p < 0.001). On subgroup analysis of patients arriving alive, improvement or stabilization in hemodynamics was similar between groups (87% vs 86%, p = 0.388; 77% vs 72%, p = 0.273). Penetrating REBOA was not independently associated with mortality (odds ratio 1.253; p = 0.776). CONCLUSIONS: Despite lower injury severity, REBOA was significantly less likely to improve or stabilize hemodynamics after penetrating trauma. Among patients arriving alive, however, outcomes were comparable, suggesting that penetrating REBOA may be most beneficial among patients with vital signs. Because hemorrhage source, catheter insertion setting, and deployment zone varied significantly between groups, existing blunt REBOA data may not be appropriately extrapolated to penetrating trauma. Further study of REBOA as a means of aortic occlusion in penetrating trauma is needed.
Assuntos
Oclusão com Balão , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Choque Hemorrágico , Ferimentos não Penetrantes , Ferimentos Penetrantes , Aorta , Oclusão com Balão/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia/etiologia , Hemorragia/terapia , Humanos , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Ressuscitação/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Choque Hemorrágico/etiologia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/complicações , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/cirurgia , Ferimentos Penetrantes/cirurgiaRESUMO
Background: The effects of aortic occlusion (AO) on brain injury are not well defined. We examined the impact of AO by resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) and resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) on outcomes in the setting of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Methods: Patients sustaining TBI who underwent RT or REBOA in zone 1 (thoracic aorta) from September 2013 to December 2018 were identified. The indication for REBOA or RT was hemodynamic collapse due to hemorrhage below the diaphragm. Primary outcomes included mortality and systemic complications. Results: 282 patients underwent REBOA or RT. Of these, 76 had mild TBI (40 REBOA, 36 RT) and 206 sustained severe TBI (107 REBOA, 99 RT). Overall, the mean (±SD) age was 42±17 years, with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 40±17 and mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) at the time of REBOA or RT of 81±34 mm Hg. REBOA patients had a mean SBP at the time of AO of 78.39±29.45 mm Hg, whereas RT patients had a mean SBP of 83.18±37.87 mm Hg at the time of AO (p=0.24). 55% had ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) at the time of AO, and the in-hospital mortality was 86%. Binomial logistic regression controlling for TBI severity, age, ISS, SBP at the time of AO, crystalloid infusion, and CPR during AO demonstrated that the odds of mortality are 3.1 times higher for RT compared with REBOA. No significant differences were found in systemic complications between RT and REBOA. Discussion: Patients with TBI who receive REBOA may have improved survival, but no difference in systemic complications, compared with patients who receive RT for the same indication. Although some patients are receiving RT prior to arrest for extrathoracic hemorrhagic shock, these results suggest that REBOA should be considered as an alternative to RT when RT is chosen for the sole purpose of resuscitation in the setting of TBI. Level of evidence: 4.