RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Mortality reviews examine US military fatalities resulting from traumatic injuries during combat operations. These reviews are essential to the evolution of the military trauma system to improve individual, unit, and system-level trauma care delivery and inform trauma system protocols and guidelines. This study identifies specific prehospital and hospital interventions with the potential to provide survival benefits. METHODS: US Special Operations Command fatalities with battle injuries deemed potentially survivable (2001-2021) were extracted from previous mortality reviews. A military trauma review panel consisting of trauma surgeons, forensic pathologists, and prehospital and emergency medicine specialists conducted a methodical review to identify prehospital, hospital, and resuscitation interventions (e.g., laparotomy, blood transfusion) with the potential to have provided a survival benefit. RESULTS: Of 388 US Special Operations Command battle-injured fatalities, 100 were deemed potentially survivable. Of these (median age, 29 years; all male), 76.0% were injured in Afghanistan, and 75% died prehospital. Gunshot wounds were in 62.0%, followed by blast injury (37%), and blunt force injury (1.0%). Most had a Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale severity classified as 4 (severe) (55.0%) and 5 (critical) (41.0%). The panel recommended 433 interventions (prehospital, 188; hospital, 315). The most recommended prehospital intervention was blood transfusion (95%), followed by finger/tube thoracostomy (47%). The most common hospital recommendations were thoracotomy and definitive vascular repair. Whole blood transfusion was assessed for each fatality: 74% would have required ≥10 U of blood, 20% would have required 5 to 10 U, 1% would have required 1 to 4 U, and 5% would not have required blood products to impact survival. Five may have benefited from a prehospital laparotomy. CONCLUSION: This study systematically identified capabilities needed to provide a survival benefit and examined interventions needed to inform trauma system efforts along the continuum of care. The determination was that blood transfusion and massive transfusion shortly after traumatic injury would impact survival the most. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level V.
Assuntos
Transfusão de Sangue , Humanos , Masculino , Adulto , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Transfusão de Sangue/normas , Transfusão de Sangue/estatística & dados numéricos , Transfusão de Sangue/métodos , Consenso , Medicina Militar/normas , Medicina Militar/métodos , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/normas , Ferimentos e Lesões/terapia , Ferimentos e Lesões/mortalidade , Militares , Ressuscitação/métodos , Ressuscitação/normas , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Ferimentos por Arma de Fogo/terapia , Ferimentos por Arma de Fogo/mortalidade , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/terapia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/mortalidade , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/diagnóstico , Traumatismos por Explosões/terapia , Traumatismos por Explosões/mortalidade , Lesões Relacionadas à Guerra/terapia , Lesões Relacionadas à Guerra/mortalidadeRESUMO
Aggregate statistics can provide intra-conflict and inter-conflict mortality comparisons and trends within and between U.S. combat operations. However, capturing individual-level data to evaluate medical and non-medical factors that influence combat casualty mortality has historically proven difficult. The Department of Defense (DoD) Trauma Registry, developed as an integral component of the Joint Trauma System during recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, has amassed individual-level data that have afforded greater opportunity for a variety of analyses and comparisons. Although aggregate statistics are easily calculated and commonly used across the DoD, other issues that require consideration include the impact of individual medical interventions, non-medical factors, non-battle-injured casualties, and incomplete or missing medical data, especially for prehospital care and forward surgical team care. Needed are novel methods to address these issues in order to provide a clearer interpretation of aggregate statistics and to highlight solutions that will ultimately increase survival and eliminate preventable death on the battlefield. Although many U.S. military combat fatalities sustain injuries deemed non-survivable, survival among these casualties might be improved using primary and secondary prevention strategies that prevent injury or reduce injury severity. The current commentary proposes adjustments to traditional aggregate combat casualty care statistics by integrating statistics from the DoD Military Trauma Mortality Review process as conducted by the Joint Trauma System and Armed Forces Medical Examiner System.