RESUMO
Die 3. Überarbeitung der S3-Leitlinie Polytrauma/Schwerverletzten-Behandlung wurde unter der Federführung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie (DGU) von insgesamt 26 Fachgesellschaften und Organisationen durchgeführt und stellt eine umfassende Aktualisierung der Handlungsempfehlungen zur Schwerverletzten-Versorgung auf Basis neuer wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse und Studien dar. Die Leitlinie enthält 332 Kernempfehlungen unterschiedlicher Empfehlungsgrade und dazugehörige Erläuterungen, die Expertenwissen und über 2400 zitierte Literaturstellen berücksichtigen und somit das höchste Niveau (S3) einer Leitlinie erfüllen. Die Änderungen, insbesondere zur Schockraumalarmierung, sind für den Rettungsdienst von besonderer Bedeutung. Zwei neue Kapitel mit Empfehlungen für die Blutstillung und Schmerzbehandlung in der prähospitalen Versorgung wurden hinzugefügt, insgesamt bleibt die Leitlinie ein wichtiger Standard für Entscheidungsfindungen bei Diagnostik und Therapie von Schwerverletzten.
RESUMO
Background/Objective: This prospective, multicenter observational cohort study was carried out in 12 trauma centers in Germany and Switzerland. Its purpose was to evaluate the rate of undertriage, as well as potential consequences, and relate these with different Trauma Team Activation Protocols (TTA-Protocols), as this has not been done before in Germany. Methods: Each trauma center collected the data during a three-month period between December 2019 and February 2021. All 12 participating hospitals are certified as supra-regional trauma centers. Here, we report a subgroup analysis of undertriaged patients. Those included in the study were all consecutive adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with acute trauma admitted to the emergency department of one of the participating hospitals by the prehospital emergency medical service (EMS) within 6 h after trauma. The data contained information on age, sex, trauma mechanism, pre- and in-hospital physiology, emergency interventions, emergency surgical interventions, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and death within 48 h. Trauma team activation (TTA) was initiated by the emergency medical services. This should follow the national guidelines for severe trauma using established field triage criteria. We used various denominators, such as ISS, and criteria for the appropriateness of TTA to evaluate the undertriage in four groups. Results: This study included a total of 3754 patients. The average injury severity score was 5.1 points, and 7.0% of cases (n = 261) presented with an injury severity score (ISS) of 16+. TTA was initiated for a total of 974 (26%) patients. In group 1, we evaluated how successful the actual practice in the EMS was in identifying patients with ISS 16+. The undertriage rate was 15.3%, but mortality was lower in the undertriage cohort compared to those with a TTA (5% vs. 10%). In group 2, we evaluated the actual practice of EMS in terms of identifying patients meeting the appropriateness of TTA criteria; this showed a higher undertriage rate of 35.9%, but as seen in group 1, the mortality was lower (5.9% vs. 3.3%). In group 3, we showed that, if the EMS were to strictly follow guideline criteria, the rate of undertriage would be even higher (26.2%) regarding ISS 16+. Using the appropriateness of TTA criteria to define the gold standard for TTA (group 4), 764 cases (20.4%) fulfilled at least one condition for retrospective definition of TTA requirement. Conclusions: Regarding ISS 16+, the rate of undertriage in actual practice was 15.3%, but those patients did not have a higher mortality.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Comparison of access times to CT and surgical/radiological bleeding control between two European military trauma centers. METHODS: Retrospective and observational study conducted in two military level 1 trauma centers in Toulon (France) and Koblenz (Germany) between 2013 and 2018. Inclusion of severe trauma patients with ISS > 15 with clinical and biological criteria of bleeding. RESULTS: Inclusion of 607 patients (318 in Toulon and 289 in Koblenz). Mean ISS 30. Median access time to CT significantly lower for Koblenz, 14 vs. 30 min; p < 0.001. Median access time to the emergency bleeding control lower in Toulon 84 min vs. 92 (p = 0.114). No impact on mortality at 24 h 9% in Koblenz and 11% in Toulon. Mortality at 28 days identical 17%. CONCLUSION: The organizational innovation at the military hospital in Koblenz saves time in the injury assessment. However, it has no impact on the access time to the scanner and on the mortality at 24 and 28 days. This fight against hemorrhage is a management bundle including delays, transfusion, and team training. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: 2,002,878 v 0.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify predictive factors for peri-pelvic vascular injury in patients with pelvic fractures and to incorporate these factors into a pelvic vascular injury score (P-VIS) to detect severe bleeding during the prehospital trauma management. METHODS: To identify potential predictive factors, data were taken (1) of a Level I Trauma Centre with 467 patients (ISS ≥ 16 and AISPelvis ≥ 3). Analysis including patient's charts and digital recordings, radiographical diagnostics, mechanism and pattern of injury as well as the vascular bleeding source was performed. Statistical analysis was performed descriptively and through inference statistical calculation. To further analyse the predictive factors and finally develop the score, a 10-year time period (2012-2021) of (2) the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU) was used in a second step. Relevant peri-pelvic bleeding in patients with AISPelvis ≥ 3 (N = 9227) was defined as a combination of the following entities (target group PVITR-DGU N = 2090; 22.7%): pelvic fracture with significant bleeding (> 20% of blood volume), Injury of the iliac or femoral artery or blood transfusion of ≥ 6 units (pRBC) prior to ICU admission. The multivariate analysis revealed nine items that constitute the pelvic vascular injury score (P-VIS). RESULTS: In study (1), 467 blunt pelvic trauma patients were included of which 24 (PVI) were presented with significant vascular injury (PVI, N = 24; control (C, N = 443). Patients with pelvic fractures and vascular injury showed a higher ISS, lower haemoglobin at admission and lower blood pressure. Their mortality rate was higher (PVI: 17.4%, C: 10.3%). In the defining and validating process of the score within the TR-DGU, 9227 patients met the inclusion criteria. 2090 patients showed significant peripelvic vascular injury (PVITR-DGU), the remaining 7137 formed the control group (CTR-DGU). Nine predictive parameters for peripelvic vascular injury constituted the peripelvic vascular injury score (P-VIS): age ≥ 70 years, high-energy-trauma, penetrating trauma/open pelvic injury, shock index ≥ 1, cardio-pulmonary-resuscitation (CPR), substitution of > 1 l fluid, intubation, necessity of catecholamine substitution, remaining shock (≤ 90 mmHg) under therapy. The multi-dimensional scoring system leads to an ordinal scaled rating according to the probability of the presence of a vascular injury. A score of ≥ 3 points described the peripelvic vascular injury as probable, a result of ≥ 6 points identified a most likely vascular injury and a score of 9 points identified an apparent peripelvic vascular injury. Reapplying this score to the study population a median score of 5 points (range 3-8) (PVI) and a median score of 2 points (range 0-3) (C) (p < 0.001). The OR for peripelvic vascular injury was 24.3 for the patients who scored > 3 points vs. ≤ 2 points. The TR-DGU data set verified these findings (median of 2 points in CTR-DGU vs. median of 3 points with in PVITR-DGU). CONCLUSION: The pelvic vascular injury score (P-VIS) allows an initial risk assessment for the presence of a vascular injury in patients with unstable pelvic injury. Thus, the management of these patients can be positively influenced at a very early stage, prehospital resuscitation performed safely targeted and further resources can be activated in the final treating Trauma Centre.
RESUMO
In this retrospective comparative study, 42 patients with single-level cervical radiculopathy were operated upon, either with Shell cage fusion (23 patients) or with Prestige cervical disc arthroplasty (19 patients). The mean follow-up (FU) was 17.5 months (range: 5.6-42.1 months). Both treatments significantly improved all clinical parameters (VAS, ODI, SF36) (p < 0.001), without statistically relevant differences between the two groups. From a radiological viewpoint there was an obvious but statistically non-significant increase in the segmental height for both treatment groups. Segmental angle also increased in both groups, and the increase was significant (p < 0.05). As expected, range of motion (ROM) decreased significantly (p < 0.05) in the fusion group, while it was preserved in the arthroplasty group. Significantly more (p < 0.05) adjacent level degeneration class 1 to 4 was evident in the fusion group (8/23 or 34.8%) than in the arthroplasty group (3/19 or 15.8%). Two fusion patients (2/23 or 8.7%) developed painful clinical adjacent level disease requiring arthroplasty. The major conclusion was that significant adjacent level degenerative changes occurred in the cage group. Retained motion at the operative site seems to decrease the incidence of adjacent level degeneration. Implant subsidence was recorded at FU in 8 out of 42 patients (19%). It occurred significantly (p < 0.05) more often in the fusion group (6/23 or 26.1%) than in the arthroplasty group (2/19 or 10.5%), but it did not cause clinical symptoms. As in other studies, there is no explanation as to why better radiological results did not translate into better clinical outcomes within the time limits of the study.
