Trends in Surgical Case Volume During Pacific Partnership Missions Onboard USNS Mercy.

INTRODUCTION: Since 2006, the U.S. Navy has conducted six Pacific Partnership (PP) missions throughout Southeast Asia on board the U.S. Naval Ship Mercy (T-AH 19). This study describes trends in overall and surgical specialty operative volumes to better understand the burden of surgical disease treated during these humanitarian and civic assistance (HCA) operations. This information can assist medical planners and surgical leaders involved in future humanitarian missions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following approval from the Naval Medical Center San Diego Institutional Review Board, a retrospective review of surgical case data was performed for the six PP missions from 2006 to 2018. Data collected included patient demographics, Current Procedural Terminology codes, and surgical specialty. The primary outcome was surgical case volume per specialty. Secondary outcomes included surgical staffing per mission and overall trends in operative volume. RESULTS: A total of 3,826 operative procedures were performed during the study period. Mission years in which case volume for both general surgery and ophthalmology were below their respective medians were associated with the least total surgical services to host nations (HNs). The number of active duty Navy surgeons varied with each mission; however, the staffing for a PP mission generally included at least two general surgeons, one ophthalmologist, one plastic surgeon, one pediatric surgeon, one orthopedic surgeon, one otolaryngologist, one oral surgeon, one urologist, and one obstetrician-gynecologist. Case volume per surgeon was highest in 2006 (50 cases per surgeon) and decreased after 2006, reaching an all-time low during the 2018 PP mission (10 cases per surgeon). Pediatric surgery and plastic surgery had the highest average case volumes per surgeon at 58 and 46 cases per surgeon, respectively, while oromaxillofacial surgery and neurosurgery had the lowest average case volumes per surgeon at 9 and 14 cases per surgeon, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Operative volume on military HCA missions is greatly influenced by the priorities of the HN, the mission focus, the number of individuals from the HN that present for screening, and the availability of personnel and resources available on the hospital ship. Future mission planning should optimize general surgery and ophthalmology staffing and essential equipment, as total mission case volumes were highly dependent upon the productivity of these two specialties. Careful determination of the surgical needs of HNs should serve as a guide for the selection of subspecialists to maximize effectiveness in future military HCA missions.

Quetiapine therapy in critically injured trauma patients is associated with an increased risk of pulmonary complications.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate quetiapine-associated pulmonary complications (PC) in critically injured trauma patients. METHODS: Injured adults admitted during 2016 to the ICU at a Level I trauma center were analyzed. Outcomes were evaluated by competing risks survival analysis. RESULTS: Of 254 admissions, 40 (15.7%) had PC and 214 (84.3%) were non-events. PC patients were more severely injured, had longer hospital stays and were more likely to die. Patients administered quetiapine were more likely to develop PC and acquire PC earlier than those without quetiapine. Quetiapine was a positive risk factor for PC (sHR 2.24, p = 0.013). Stratification by ventilator use revealed non-ventilated patients administered quetiapine had the highest risk for PC (sHR 4.66, p = 0.099). CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine exposure in critically injured trauma patients was associated with increased risk of PC. Guidelines for treatment of delirium with quetiapine in critically injured trauma patients should account for this risk.

Radiofrequency Identification of the ER-REBOA: Confirmation of Placement Without Fluoroscopy.

INTRODUCTION: Non-compressible torso hemorrhage accounts for 70% of battlefield deaths. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is an emerging technology used to mitigate massive truncal hemorrhage. Use of REBOA on the battlefield is limited by the need for radiographic guided balloon placement. Radiofrequency identification (RFID) is a simple, portable, real-time technology utilized to detect retained sponges during surgery. We investigated the feasibility of RFID to confirm the placement of ER-REBOA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-arm prospective proof-of-concept experimental study approved by the institutional review board at Naval Medical Center San Diego. The ER-REBOA (Prytime Medical Devices, Inc, Boerne, TX, USA) was modified by placement of a RFID tag. The tagged ER-REBOA was placed in zone I or zone III of the aorta in a previously perfused cadaver. Exact location was documented with X-ray. Five blinded individuals used the RF Assure Detection System (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) handheld detection wand to predict catheter tip location from the xiphoid process (zone I) or pubic tubercle (zone III). RESULTS: In zone I, actual distance (Da) of the catheter tip was 11 cm from the xiphoid process. Mean predicted distance (Dp) from Da was 1.52 cm (95% CI 1.19-1.85). In zone III, Da was 14 cm from the pubic tubercle. Mean Dp from Da was 4.11 cm (95% CI 3.68-4.54). Sensitivity of detection was 100% in both zones. Specificity (Defined as Dp within 2 cm of Da) was 86% in zone I and 16% in zone III. CONCLUSIONS: Using RFID to confirm the placement of ER-REBOA is feasible with specificity highest in zone I. Future work should focus on refining this technology for the forward-deployed setting.

The prevalence of chronic deep venous thrombosis in trauma: Implications for hospitals and patients.

INTRODUCTION: Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is considered a preventable complication in trauma patients. Hospitals risk financial penalties for DVT rates above accepted benchmarks. These penalties do not apply to chronic DVT, which develops before admission. Lower-extremity duplex ultrasound (LEDUS) can detect characteristics of thrombus chronicity, allowing differentiation of chronic from acute DVT. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of chronic DVT in hospitalized trauma patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of trauma patients admitted to our Level I trauma center between July 1, 2006 and October 31, 2016 who had a DVT on initial screening LEDUS. Our center utilizes screening and surveillance LEDUS for patients admitted more than 48 hours. Definitions for chronic and acute DVT were extracted from existing literature. Patients with DVT on initial LEDUS underwent review of that LEDUS to assess clot chronicity and were classified as having acute DVT, chronic DVT, or DVT of indeterminate age. Demographic data, medical history, and injury characteristics were collected. Patients with acute DVT and those with chronic DVT were compared. RESULTS: The prevalence of chronic DVT among patients with a DVT on initial LEDUS was 29.9%. Chronic DVT occurred in patients who were older and less severely injured. An above-knee component was significantly more common in chronic DVT (65%). Only 34 (41%) of those with chronic DVT reported a history of DVT. Among the patients with chronic DVT, 44 (53%) had a subsequent LEDUS, of whom 4 (9%) showed thrombus progression and 6 (14%) formed a new DVT. CONCLUSION: Lower-extremity duplex ultrasound can identify chronic DVT, which represents nearly 30% of all DVT found on initial screening LEDUS in trauma patients. Those with chronic DVT should receive pharmacologic and mechanical prophylaxis because of the incidence of progression and new acute DVT. They should also be counseled regarding the possibilities of recurrence and chronic venous insufficiency. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic study, level III.

The rate of deep vein thrombosis doubles in trauma patients with hypercoagulable thromboelastography.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in trauma can occur in patients at low risk. Conventional coagulation tests do not predict VTE. Studies investigating thromboelastography (TEG) for VTE risk are conflicting and have not included routine surveillance to detect deep vein thrombosis (DVT). We undertook a prospective study of TEG to evaluate its utility in predicting VTE. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study on all adult trauma patients admitted to our Level I trauma center from 2013 to 2015. TEG was performed immediately on arrival to the trauma bay. Hypercoagulable TEG was defined as reaction time (R) below, angle (α) above, or maximum amplitude (MA) above reference ranges. All patients received mechanical and/or pharmacologic prophylaxis and were followed up for DVT with our ultrasound surveillance protocol. The primary outcome was lower-extremity DVT. After bivariate analysis of variables related to DVT, those with p values of 0.100 or less were included for multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 983 patients were evaluated with TEG on admission; of these, 684 (69.6%) received at least one surveillance ultrasound during the index admission. Lower-extremity DVT was diagnosed in 99 (14.5%) patients. Hypercoagulability based on admission TEG occurred in 582 (85.1%) patients. The lower-extremity DVT rate was higher in patients with hypercoagulable TEG than in those without hypercoagulable TEG (15.6% vs. 8%; p = 0.039). Multivariate analysis showed hypercoagulable TEG remained associated with DVT after adjustment for relevant covariates available at admission, with an odds ratio of 2.41 (95% confidence interval, 1.11-5.24; p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Most trauma patients were hypercoagulable at admission and remained at risk of developing DVT. The rate of DVT doubled in patients with hypercoagulable TEG indices despite prophylaxis. Beyond its current clinical roles, TEG is useful for assessing DVT risk, particularly in patients otherwise perceived to be at low risk. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level II.

"Delay to operating room" fails to identify adverse outcomes at a Level I trauma center.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma devised process audit filters to identify opportunities for improvement (OFI), prevent adverse outcomes, and improve quality. Delay to the operating room for primary trauma laparotomy is a process audit filter that has not been definitively associated with improved outcomes. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of delay to the operating room of greater than 2 hours (DOR) to independently identify an adverse outcome or an OFI at our Level I trauma center. METHODS: Trauma patients who underwent primary exploratory laparotomy from July 2006 to March 2015 were reviewed. Those with DOR were identified and compared with those without DOR. To analyze the ability of DOR to independently identify an adverse outcome or an OFI, DOR patients were further divided into those with isolated DOR and those with DOR in conjunction with one or more other process audit filter. Primary outcome was the presence of a complication. Secondary outcome was an identified OFI. Medical records of patients with either outcome were reviewed to determine if the outcome resulted directly from DOR. RESULTS: Of 472 patients, 109 (23%) had DOR and 363 (77%) did not. There were no significant differences in age, sex, or injury severity between the two groups. The rates of complications among DOR patients and those without DOR were not significantly different (35% vs. 38%, p = 0.59). The DOR was the only process audit filter flagged in 31(28%) patients in the DOR group. This subgroup had no identified complications but incurred two OFIs; neither OFI was associated with an adverse outcome. CONCLUSION: In trauma patients undergoing primary exploratory laparotomy, DOR fails to independently identify adverse outcomes. These findings suggest that DOR, as a routinely collected process audit filter, is not an effective indicator of suboptimal care or adverse outcomes at a Level I trauma center. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV; prognostic study, level III.

Routine neurosurgical consultation is not necessary in mild blunt traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: The Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines provide indications for neurosurgical intervention in traumatic brain injury (TBI) with moderate or severe intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). In TBI patients with less severe ICH, the utility of neurosurgical consultation remains unclear. We sought to determine if routine neurosurgical consultation is necessary for mild blunt TBI patients with ICH. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 500 consecutive blunt TBI patients aged 15 years or older with Glasgow Coma Scale score of ≥13 and ICH on initial head computed tomography admitted to a Level I trauma center over 28 months. Outcomes were neurosurgical intervention (craniotomy, craniectomy, ventriculostomy, or intracranial pressure monitor placement) and in-hospital mortality. Statistical significance was assessed at a p < 0.05. RESULTS: Of 500 patients, 49 (9.8%) underwent neurosurgical intervention. Neurosurgical intervention was more frequent in male patients (75.5% vs. 61.2%, p = 0.049), patients with higher head Abbreviated Injury Scale score (4.7 vs. 3.8, p < 0.0001), patients with an abnormal initial neurological examination (30.6% vs. 12.6%, p = 0.001), or patients with skull fracture (28.6% vs. 16.0%, p = 0.026) and was associated with higher mortality (8.2% vs. 2.0%, p = 0.010). Neurosurgical intervention was not associated with intoxication, preinjury antiplatelet/anticoagulation agents, or progression of ICH on second head computed tomography. Neurosurgical consultation was documented in 466 patients (93.2%). For patients without neurosurgical intervention, consultation did not change management. CONCLUSION: Routine neurosurgical consultation for blunt TBI with ICH seems unnecessary, regardless of intoxication or preinjury antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy. A more selective approach is warranted to decrease hospital charges and optimize use of neurosurgical consultation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management study, level IV.

Sarcopenia as a predictor of mortality in elderly blunt trauma patients: Comparing the masseter to the psoas using computed tomography.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia, or age-related loss of muscle mass, is measurable by computed tomography (CT). In elderly trauma patients, increased mortality is associated with decreased psoas muscle cross-sectional area (P-Area) on abdominal CT. Fall is the leading cause of injury in the elderly, and head CT is more often obtained. Masseter muscle cross-sectional area (M-Area) is readily measured on head CT. Hypothesizing that M-Area is a satisfactory surrogate for P-Area, we compared the two as markers of sarcopenia and increased mortality in elderly trauma patients. METHODS: All blunt-injured patients aged 65 years or older admitted to our trauma center during 2010 were included. Two-year postdischarge mortality was identified by matching records to county, state, and national death indices. Bilateral M-Area was measured on admission head CT at 2 cm below the zygomatic arch. Bilateral P-Area was measured on abdominal CT at the fourth vertebral body. Average M-Area and P-Area values were calculated for each patient. Cox proportional hazards models evaluated the relationship of M-Area and P-Area with mortality. Model predictive performance was calculated using concordance statistics. RESULTS: Among 487 patients, 357 with M-Area and 226 with P-Area were identified. Females had smaller M-Area (3.43 cm vs 4.18 cm; p < 0.050) and P-Area (6.50 cm vs 10.9 cm; p < 0.050) than males. Masseter muscle cross-sectional area correlated with P-Area (rho, 0.38; p < 0.001). Adjusted Cox regression models revealed decreased survival associated with declining M-Area (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.96) and P-Area (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-1.00). Masseter muscle cross-sectional area and P-Area discriminated equally well in best-fit models. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly trauma patients, M-Area is an equally valid and more readily available marker of sarcopenia and 2-year mortality than P-Area. Future study should validate M-Area as a metric to identify at-risk patients who may benefit from early intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.

Aspirin as added prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis in trauma: A retrospective case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Current prophylaxis does not completely prevent deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in trauma patients. Recent data suggest that platelets may be a major contributor to hypercoagulability after trauma, indicating a potential role for antiplatelet medications in prophylaxis for DVT. We sought to determine if preinjury aspirin use was associated with a reduced incidence of lower extremity DVT in trauma patients. METHODS: Using a retrospective case-control design, we matched 110 cases of posttrauma lower extremity DVT one-to-one with controls using seven covariates: age, admission date, probability of death, number of DVT risk factors, sex, mechanism of injury, and presence of head injury. Data collected included 26 risk factors for DVT, prehospital medications, and in-hospital prophylaxis. Logistic regression models were created to examine the relationship between prehospital aspirin use and posttrauma DVT. RESULTS: Preinjury aspirin was used by 7.3% of cases (patients diagnosed with in-hospital DVT) compared with 13.6% of controls (p = 0.1). Aspirin was associated with a significant protective effect in multivariate analysis, with an odds ratio of 0.17 (95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.68; p = 0.012) in the most complete model. When stratified by other antithrombotic use, aspirin showed a significant effect only when used in combination with heparinoid prophylaxis (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.93; p = 0.036). CONCLUSION: Preinjury aspirin use seems to significantly lower DVT rate following injury. This association is strongest when heparinoid prophylaxis is prescribed after patients on preinjury aspirin therapy are admitted. Aspirin as added prophylaxis for DVT in trauma patients needs to be further evaluated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and epidemiologic study, level III.