The incidence of acute venous injury as a result of proximity penetrating trauma screened with colour flow duplex ultrasound.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of acute deep venous thrombosis as a result of penetrating proximity extremity trauma (PPET) to the thigh has been demonstrated to be 16% in a single report. The purpose of the current study is to demonstrate the incidence and clinical significance of venous injury as a result of proximity trauma to the thigh in a large cohort screened with colour flow duplex (CFD) ultrasound and to identify factors predictive of defining a wound in proximity to a major vascular structure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted from January 1st, 2010 to January 1st, 2012 on all patients presenting with penetrating extremity trauma. Data on injury location, mechanism, associated extremity and non-extremity injuries, use and results of CFD, as well as the admitting trauma surgeon were recorded and analysed. RESULTS: 220 thigh wounds with a normal physical examination were identified, of which 167 (75.9%) underwent CFD due to proximity. The incidence of acute venous injury was 4.8% (8/167). 37.5% (3/8) of these injuries resulted in morbidity. Injury mechanism and which attending physician was on call were predictive of a wound being defined as in proximity, whereas an injury with an associated fracture was a negative predictor. CONCLUSIONS: Occult venous injuries as a result of PPET occur in 4.8% of patients with thigh wounds in proximity to a major vascular structure. The designation of a wound as being in "proximity" was influenced by injury mechanism, associated fractures, and the judgement of the on-call attending. Colour flow duplex is a valuable tool with the ability to identify not only occult arterial injuries, but also venous injuries with the potential to cause significant morbidity as well.

Color-flow duplex screening for upper extremity proximity injuries: a low-yield strategy for therapeutic intervention.

BACKGROUND: Although the incidence of injury to the upper extremity screened with angiography as a result of proximity penetrating trauma is similar to that of the lower extremity, intervention rates seem to be higher. However, studies evaluating the incidence of injury as a result of proximity penetrating trauma have primarily focused on the lower extremity. This study shows the incidence and clinical significance of vascular injury as a result of proximity trauma to the upper extremity in a large cohort of patients screened with color-flow duplex. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted from January 1, 2005 to January 1, 2012 on all patients undergoing color-flow duplex as a result of proximity penetrating trauma to the upper extremity. Data on injury location, mechanism, associated extremity and nonextremity injuries, and use and results of color-flow duplex were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 341 patients were identified who underwent color-flow duplex because of proximity penetrating trauma to the upper extremity. Injuries occurred in 370 extremities, with 253 located in the upper arm and 117 in the forearm. Overall, 18 (4.9%) injuries were identified on screening duplex ultrasound, of which 12 (3.2%) were arterial and 5 (1.4%) were venous. The therapeutic intervention rate for detected injuries to the upper arm was 1.6% (4/253), whereas no injuries of the forearm were identified that necessitated intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Although color-flow duplex is an inexpensive and noninvasive means of detecting injuries as a result of proximity penetrating trauma, screening upper extremity wounds is unlikely to detect clinically significant arterial injuries in need of therapeutic intervention. Venous injuries in the form of deep venous thromboses were detected in only 1.4% of patients. These findings suggest that screening for proximity penetrating trauma of the upper extremity is unlikely to detect injuries at a rate that would prove cost-effective on formal decision analysis.

Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guidelines for hemorrhage in pelvic fracture--update and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage from pelvic fracture is common in victims of blunt traumatic injury. In 2001, the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) published practice management guidelines for the management of hemorrhage in pelvic trauma. Since that time there have been new practice patterns and larger experiences with older techniques. The Practice Guidelines Committee of EAST decided to replace the 2001 guidelines with an updated guideline and systematic review reflecting current practice. METHODS: Building on the previous systematic literature review in the 2001 EAST guidelines, a systematic literature review was performed to include references from 1999 to 2010. Prospective and retrospective studies were included. Reviews and case reports were excluded. Of the 1,432 articles identified, 50 were selected as meeting criteria. Nine Trauma Surgeons, an Interventional Radiologist, and an Orthopedic Surgeon reviewed the articles. The EAST primer was used to grade the evidence. RESULTS: Six questions regarding hemorrhage from pelvic fracture were addressed: (1) Which patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures warrant early external mechanical stabilization? (2) Which patients require emergent angiography? (3) What is the best test to exclude extrapelvic bleeding? (4) Are there radiologic findings which predict hemorrhage? (5) What is the role of noninvasive temporary external fixation devices? and (6) Which patients warrant preperitoneal packing? CONCLUSIONS: Hemorrhage due to pelvic fracture remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the trauma patient. Strong recommendations were made regarding questions 1 to 4. Further study is needed to answer questions 5 and 6.

The consequences of noncompliance with guidelines for withholding or terminating resuscitation in traumatic cardiac arrest patients.

BACKGROUND: The validity of current guidelines regarding resuscitation of patients in traumatic cardiopulmonary arrest (TCPA) and the ability of emergency medical services (EMS) to appropriately apply them have been called into question. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the consequences of violating the current published guidelines and whether EMS personnel were able to accurately identify patients in TCPA. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of our Level I trauma center's database that identified 294 patients over an 8-year period (January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2010) who suffered prehospital TCPA and met criteria for the withholding or termination of resuscitation based on current guidelines. Patient demographics, prehospital/emergency department physiology, survival, neurologic outcome, and hospital charges were analyzed. RESULTS: One of 294 patients (0.3%) survived to reach hospital discharge with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 6. The total costs incurred for these 294 patients meeting criteria for withholding or termination of resuscitation were $3,852,446.65. One hundred seventeen (39.8%) patients were evaluated by more than one EMS team. There was 100% agreement on the presence (15 of 15) or absence (102 of 102) of a pulse between the EMS teams. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the current guidelines regarding the withholding or termination of resuscitation of patients in prehospital TCPA and represent the largest series to date on this topic. EMS personnel were able to accurately determine traumatic cardiac arrest in the field in this series. Violation of the current guidelines resulted in six patients being resuscitated to a neurologically devastated state. No loss of neurologically intact survivors would have resulted had strict adherence to the guidelines been maintained.

Blunt cerebrovascular injury practice management guidelines: the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Blunt injury to the carotid or vertebral vessels (blunt cerebrovascular injury [BCVI]) is diagnosed in approximately 1 of 1,000 (0.1%) patients hospitalized for trauma in the United States with the majority of these injuries diagnosed after the development of symptoms secondary to central nervous system ischemia, with a resultant neurologic morbidity of up to 80% and associated mortality of up to 40%. With screening, the incidence rises to 1% of all blunt trauma patients and as high as 2.7% in patients with an Injury Severity Score of >or=16. The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma organization Practice Management Guidelines committee set out to develop an EBM guideline for the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of BCVI. METHODS: A computerized search of the National Library of Medicine/National Institute of Health, Medline database was performed using citations from 1965 to 2005 inclusive. Titles and abstracts were reviewed to determine relevance, and isolated case reports, small case series, editorials, letters to the editor, and review articles were eliminated. The bibliographies of the resulting full-text articles were searched for other relevant citations, and these were obtained as needed. These papers were reviewed based on the following questions: 1. What patients are of high enough risk, so that diagnostic evaluation should be pursued for the screening and diagnosis of BCVI? 2. What is the appropriate modality for the screening and diagnosis of BCVI? 3. How should BCVI be treated? 4. If indicated, for how long should antithrombotic therapy be administered? 5. How should one monitor the response to therapy? RESULTS: One hundred seventy-nine articles were selected for review, and of these, 68 met inclusion criteria and are excerpted in the attached evidentiary table and used to make recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The East Practice Management Guidelines Committee suggests guidelines that should be safe and efficacious for the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of BCVI. Risk factors for screening are identified (see ), screening modalities are reviewed indicating that although angiography remains the gold standard, multi-planar (>or==8 slice) CT angiography may be equivalent, and treatment algorithms are evaluated. It is noted that change in the diagnosis and management of this injury constellation is rapid due to technological advancement and the difficulties inherent in performing randomized prospective trials in this patient population.

Guidelines for prehospital fluid resuscitation in the injured patient.

Although the need and benefit of prehospital interventions has been controversial for quite some time, an increasing amount of evidence has stirred both sides into more frequent debate. Proponents of the traditional "scoop-and-run" technique argue that this approach allows a more timely transfer to definitive care facilities and limits unnecessary (and potentially harmful) procedures. However, advocates of the "stay-and-play" method point to improvement in survival to reach the hospital and better neurologic outcomes after brain injury. Given the lack of consensus, the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma convened a Practice Management Guideline committee to answer the following questions regarding prehospital resuscitation: (1) should injured patients have vascular access attempted in the prehospital setting? (2) if so, what location is preferred for access? (3) if access is achieved, should intravenous fluids be administered? (4) if fluids are to be administered, which solution is preferred? and (5) if fluids are to be administered, what volume and rate should be infused?