Impact of platelet transfusion on outcomes in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Trauma-induced coagulopathy includes thrombocytopenia and platelet dysfunction that impact patient outcome. Nevertheless, the role of platelet transfusion remains poorly defined. The aim of the study was 1/ to evaluate the impact of early platelet transfusion on 24-h all-cause mortality and 2/ to describe platelet count at admission (PCA) and its relationship with trauma severity and outcome. METHODS: Observational study carried out on a multicentre prospective trauma registry. All adult trauma patients directly admitted in participating trauma centres between May 2011 and June 2019 were included. Severe haemorrhage was defined as ≥ 4 red blood cell units within 6 h and/or death from exsanguination. The impact of PCA and early platelet transfusion (i.e. within the first 6 h) on 24-h all-cause mortality was assessed using uni- and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among the 19,596 included patients, PCA (229 G/L [189,271]) was associated with coagulopathy, traumatic burden, shock and bleeding severity. In a logistic regression model, 24-h all-cause mortality increased by 37% for every 50 G/L decrease in platelet count (OR 0.63 95% CI 0.57-0.70; p < 0.001). Regarding patients with severe hemorrhage, platelets were transfused early for 36% of patients. Early platelet transfusion was associated with a decrease in 24-h all-cause mortality (versus no or late platelets): OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.34-0.79; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: PCA, although mainly in normal range, was associated with trauma severity and coagulopathy and was predictive of bleeding intensity and outcome. Early platelet transfusion within 6 h was associated with a decrease in mortality in patients with severe hemorrhage. Future studies are needed to determine which doses of platelet transfusion will improve outcomes after major trauma.

Femoral arterial and central venous catheters in the trauma resuscitation room.

BACKGROUND: Arterial and central venous femoral catheters (fAC-CVC) use during the initial management of severe trauma patients is not a standard technique in most trauma centers. Arguments in favor of their use are: continuous monitoring of blood pressure, safe drug administration, easy blood sampling and potentially large bore venous access. The lack of evidence makes the practice heterogeneous. The aim of the present study was to describe the use and complications of fAC-CVC in the trauma bay in two centers where they are routinely used. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of routine fAC-CVC use from two French trauma centers. All patients admitted directly to the trauma resuscitation room were included. Demographic, clinical and biological data were collected from the scene to discharge to describe the use of catheters during initial trauma management including infectious, mechanical and thrombotic complications. RESULTS: 243 pairs of femoral catheters were inserted among 692 patients admitted in both trauma centers. Femoral AC-CVC use was more frequent in critically ill patients with higher ISS 26 [17; 41] vs 13 [8; 24], p < 0.001(median [quartile 1-3]), severe traumatic brain injury (AIS head 1[0-4] vs 0[0-3], p < 0.001), lower systolic blood pressure, 92 (37) vs 113 (28) mmHg, p < 0.001 mean (standard deviation), lower haemoglobin on arrival, 10.9 (3) vs 13.3 (2.1) g/dL (p < 0.001), and higher blood lactate concentration, 4.0 (3.9) vs 2.1 (1.8) mmol/L (p < 0.001). In patients with fAC-CVC use time in the trauma room was longer, 46 [40;60] vs 30 [20;40] minutes (p < 0.05). In total 52 colonizations and 3 bloodstream infections were noted in 1000 catheter days. An incidence of 12% of mechanical complications and of 42% deep venous thromboses were observed. Of the latter none was associated with confirmed pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSION: Femoral AC-CVC appeared to be deployed more often in critically ill patients, presenting with shock and/or traumatic brain injury in particular. The observed rate of complications in this sample seems to be low compared to reported rates.

High level of venous thromboembolism in critically ill trauma patients despite early and well-driven thromboprophylaxis protocol.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is one of the most common preventable causes of in-hospital death in trauma patients surviving their injuries. We assessed the prevalence, incidence and risk factors for deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in critically ill trauma patients, in the setting of a mature and early mechanical and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis protocol. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study on a cohort of patients from a surgical intensive care unit of a university level 1 trauma centre. We enrolled consecutive primary trauma patients expected to be in intensive care for ≥48 h. Thromboprophylaxis was protocol driven. DVT screening was performed by duplex ultrasound of upper and lower extremities within the first 48 h, between 5 and 7 days and then weekly until discharge. We recorded VTE risk factors at baseline and on each examination day. Independent risk factors were analysed using a multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: In 153 patients with a mean Injury Severity Score of 23 ± 12, the prevalence of VTE was 30.7%, 95 CI [23.7-38.8] (29.4% DVT and 4.6% PE). The incidence was 18%, 95 CI [14-24] patients-week. The median time of apparition of DVT was 6 days [1; 4]. The global protocol compliance was 77.8% with a median time of introduction of the pharmacological prophylaxis of 1 day [1; 2]. We identified four independent risk factors for VTE: central venous catheter (OR 4.39, 95 CI [1.1-29]), medullar injury (OR 5.59, 95 CI [1.7-12.9]), initial systolic arterial pressure <80 mmHg (OR 3.64, 95 CI [1.3-10.8]), and pelvic fracture (OR 3.04, 95 CI [1.2-7.9]). CONCLUSION: Despite a rigorous, protocol-driven thromboprophylaxis, critically ill trauma patients showed a high incidence of VTE. Further research is needed to tailor pharmacological prophylaxis and balance the risks and benefits.

Ultrasound assessment of gastric volume in critically ill patients.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility and validity of ultrasonographic measurement of gastric antral cross-sectional area (usCSA) in critically ill patients to predict gastric volume and the use of computed tomography (CT) as a reference to measure gastric volume. METHOD: This single-center, prospective, cross-sectional study included 55 critically ill patients who had an abdominal CT scan. usCSA measurements were performed within the hour preceding the CT scan. Gastric volumes were measured on the CT scan using semiautomatic software. The feasibility rate, performing conditions (% "good" and "poor"), internal and external validity of antral usCSA measurements, performed by an ICU physician, were assessed to predict gastric volume. RESULTS: Antral usCSA measurements were feasible in 95% of cases and were positively correlated with gastric volume measured by the CT scan when performed in "good" conditions (65%) (r = 0.43). There was good reproducibility of measurements (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.97, CI 95% 0.96-0.99) and there was clinically acceptable agreement between measurements performed by radiologists and intensivists (bias -0.12 cm(2)). The receiver operating characteristic curve identified a cutoff value of 3.6 cm(2) that discriminated an "at-risk stomach" (volume >0.8 mL/kg) at a sensitivity of 76% and a specificity of 78%. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasonographic measurement of antral CSA is feasible and reliable in the majority of critically ill patients. This technique could be useful to manage critically ill patients at risk of aspiration or with enteral feeding.