Variation in use of damage control laparotomy for trauma by trauma centers in the United States, Canada, and Australasia.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown how frequently damage control (DC) laparotomy is used across trauma centers in different countries. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of trauma centers in the United States, Canada, and Australasia to study variations in use of the procedure and predictors of more frequent use of DC laparotomy. METHODS: A self-administered, electronic, cross-sectional survey of trauma centers in the United States, Canada, and Australasia was conducted. The survey collected information about trauma center and program characteristics. It also asked how often the trauma program director estimated DC laparotomy was performed on injured patients at that center on average over the last year. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of a higher reported frequency of use of DC laparotomy. RESULTS: Of the 366 potentially eligible trauma centers sent the survey, 199 (51.8%) trauma program directors or leaders responded [United States = 156 (78.4%), Canada = 26 (13.1%), and Australasia = 17 (8.5%)]. The reported frequency of use of DC laparotomy was highly variable across trauma centers. DC laparotomy was used more frequently in level-1 than level-2 or -3 trauma centers. Further, high-volume level-1 centers used DC laparotomy significantly more often than lower volume level-1 centers (p = 0.02). Nearly half (48.4%) of high-volume volume level-1 trauma centers reported using the procedure at least once weekly. Significant adjusted predictors of more frequent use of DC laparotomy included country of origin [odds ratio (OR) for the United States vs. Canada = 7.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39-40.27], level-1 verification status (OR = 6.02; 95% CI 2.01-18.06), and the assessment of a higher number of severely injured (Injury Severity Scale score > 15) patients (OR per-100 patients = 1.62; 95% CI 1.20-2.18) and patients with penetrating injuries (OR per-5% increase = 1.27; 95% CI 1.01-1.58) in the last year. CONCLUSIONS: The reported frequency of use of DC laparotomy was highly variable across trauma centers. Those centers that most need to evaluate the benefit-to-risk ratio of using DC laparotomy in different scenarios may include high-volume, level-1 trauma centers, particularly those that often manage penetrating injuries.

Older trauma patients are at high risk of delirium, especially those with underlying dementia or baseline frailty.

BACKGROUND: Given the increasing numbers of older patients presenting with trauma, and the potential influence of delirium on outcomes, we sought to investigate the proportion of such patients who were diagnosed with delirium during their stay-and patient factors associated therewith-and the potential associations between delirium and hospital length of stay (LOS). We hypothesized that delirium would be common, associated with certain patient characteristics, and associated with long hospital LOS (highest quartile). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of all trauma patients aged ≥65 years presenting in September to October 2019, interrogating medical records and the institutional trauma database. The primary outcome measure was occurrence of delirium. RESULTS: Among 99 eligible patients, delirium was common, documented in 23% (23 of 99). On multivariable analysis, adjusting for age, frailty and history of dementia, frailty (OR 4.09, 95% CI 1.08 to 15.53, p=0.04) and dementia (OR 5.23, 95% CI 1.38 to 19.90, p=0.02) were independently associated with likelihood of delirium. Standardized assessment tools were underused, with only 34% (34 of 99) screened within 4 hours of arrival. On univariate logistic regression analysis, having an episode of delirium was associated with long LOS (highest quartile), OR of 5.29 (95% CI 1.92 to 14.56, p<0.001). In the final multivariable model, adjusting for any (non-delirium) in-hospital complication, delirium was independently associated with long LOS (≥16 days; OR 4.81, p=0.005). DISCUSSION: In this study, delirium was common. History of dementia and baseline frailty were associated with increased risk. Delirium was independently associated with long LOS. However, many patients did not undergo standardized screening at admission. Early identification and targeted management of older patients at risk of delirium may reduce incidence and improve care of this vulnerable cohort. These data are hypothesis generating, but support the need for initiatives which improve delirium care, acknowledging the complex interplay between frailty and other geriatric syndromes in the older trauma patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A Prospective Evaluation of the Utility of a Hybrid Operating Suite for Severely Injured Patients: Overstated or Underutilized?

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the utility, clinical impact, and work flow of a new trauma hybrid operating theater. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The potential utility and clinical benefit of hybrid operating theaters are increasingly postulated. Unfortunately, the clinical outcomes and efficiencies of these environments remain unclear. METHODS: All severely injured patients who were transferred to the hybrid suite for emergent intervention between 2013 and 2017 were compared to consecutive prehybrid patients. Standard statistical methodology was employed (P < 0.05 = significant). RESULTS: One hundred sixty-nine patients with severe injuries (mean ISS = 23; hemodynamic instability = 70%; hospital/ICU stay = 12 d; mortality = 14%) were transferred urgently to the hybrid suite. Most were young (38 yrs) males (84%) with blunt injuries (51%). Combined hybrid trauma procedures occurred in 18% of cases (surgery (82%) and angiography (11%) alone). Procedures within the hybrid suite included: laparotomy (57%), extremity (14%), thoracotomy/sternotomy (12%), angioembolization of the spleen/pelvis/liver/other (9%), neck (9%), craniotomy (4%), and aortic endostenting (6%). Compared with historical controls, use of the hybrid suite resulted in shorter arrival to intervention and total procedure times (P < 0.05). A clear benefit for survival was evident (42% vs. 22%). CONCLUSIONS: Availability of a hybrid environment for severely injured patients reduces time to intervention, total procedural duration, blood product transfusion and salvages a small subset of patients who would not otherwise survive. The cost associated with a hybrid suite remains prohibitive for many centers.

Ten-year evolution of a massive transfusion protocol in a level 1 trauma centre: have outcomes improved?

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the evolution and implementation of the massive transfusion protocol (MTP) in an urban level 1 trauma centre. Most data on this topic comes from trauma centres with high exposure to life-threatening haemorrhage. This study examines the effect of the introduction of an MTP in an Australian level 1 trauma centre. METHODS: A retrospective study of prospectively collected data was performed over a 14-year period. Three groups of trauma patients, who received more than 10 units of packed red blood cells (PRBC), were compared: a pre-MTP group (2002-2006), an MTP-I group (2006-2010) and an MTP-II group (2010-2016) when the protocol was updated. Key outcomes were mortality, complications and number of blood products transfused. RESULTS: A total of 168 patients were included: 54 pre-MTP patients were compared to 47 MTP-I and 67 MTP-II patients. In the MTP-II group, fewer units of PRBC and platelets were administered within the first 24 h: 17 versus 14 (P = 0.01) and 12 versus 8 (P < 0.001), respectively. Less infections were noted in the MTP-I group: 51.9% versus 31.9% (P = 0.04). No significant differences were found regarding mortality, ventilator days, intensive care unit and total hospital lengths of stay. CONCLUSION: Introduction of an MTP-II in our level 1 civilian trauma centre significantly reduced the amount of PRBC and platelets used during damage control resuscitation. Introduction of the MTP did not directly impact survival or the incidence of complications. Nevertheless, this study reflects the complexity of real-life medical care in a level 1 civilian trauma centre.

Indications for Use of Damage Control Surgery in Civilian Trauma Patients: A Content Analysis and Expert Appropriateness Rating Study.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize and evaluate indications for use of damage control (DC) surgery in civilian trauma patients. BACKGROUND: Although DC surgery may improve survival in select, severely injured patients, the procedure is associated with significant morbidity, suggesting that it should be used only when appropriately indicated. METHODS: Two investigators used an abbreviated grounded theory method to synthesize indications for DC surgery reported in peer-reviewed articles between 1983 and 2014 into a reduced number of named, content-characteristic codes representing unique indications. An international panel of trauma surgery experts (n = 9) then rated the appropriateness (expected benefit-to-harm ratio) of the coded indications for use in surgical practice. RESULTS: The 1107 indications identified in the literature were synthesized into 123 unique pre- (n = 36) and intraoperative (n = 87) indications. The panel assessed 101 (82.1%) of these indications to be appropriate. The indications most commonly reported and assessed to be appropriate included pre- and intraoperative hypothermia (median temperature <34°C), acidosis (median pH <7.2), and/or coagulopathy. Others included 5 different injury patterns, inability to control bleeding by conventional methods, administration of a large volume of packed red blood cells (median >10 units), inability to close the abdominal wall without tension, development of abdominal compartment syndrome during attempted abdominal wall closure, and need to reassess extent of bowel viability. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified a comprehensive list of candidate indications for use of DC surgery. These indications provide a practical foundation to guide surgical practice while studies are conducted to evaluate their impact on patient care and outcomes.

Indications for use of thoracic, abdominal, pelvic, and vascular damage control interventions in trauma patients: A content analysis and expert appropriateness rating study.

BACKGROUND: The use of abbreviated or damage control (DC) interventions may improve outcomes in severely injured patients when appropriately indicated. We sought to determine which indications for DC interventions have been most commonly reported in the peer-reviewed literature to date and evaluate the opinions of experts regarding the appropriateness (expected benefit-to-harm ratio) of the reported indications for use in practice. METHODS: Two investigators used an abbreviated grounded theory method to synthesize indications for 16 different DC interventions reported in peer-reviewed articles between 1983 and 2014 into a reduced number of named, content-characteristic codes representing unique indications. For each indication code, an international panel of trauma surgery experts (n = 9) then rated the appropriateness of conducting the DC intervention of interest in an adult civilian trauma patient. RESULTS: The 424 indications identified in the literature were synthesized into 101 unique indications. The panel assessed 12 (70.6%) of the coded indications for the 7 different thoracic, 47 (78.3%) for the 7 different abdominal/pelvic, and 18 (75.0%) for the 2 different vascular interventions to be appropriate for use in practice. These included indications for rapid lung-sparing surgery (pneumonorrhaphy, pulmonary tractotomy, and pulmonary wedge resection) (n = 1); pulmonary tractotomy (n = 3); rapid, simultaneously stapled pneumonectomy (n = 1); therapeutic mediastinal and/or pleural space packing (n = 4); temporary thoracic closure (n = 3); therapeutic perihepatic packing (n = 28); staged pancreaticoduodenectomy (n = 2); temporary abdominal closure (n = 12); extraperitoneal pelvic packing (n = 5); balloon catheter tamponade (n = 6); and temporary intravascular shunting (n = 11). CONCLUSION: This study identified a list of candidate appropriate indications for use of 12 different DC interventions that were suggested by authors of peer-reviewed articles and assessed by a panel of independent experts to be appropriate. These indications may be used to focus future research and (in the interim) guide surgical practice while studies are conducted to evaluate their impact on patient outcomes.

Identifying patients at risk for high-grade intra-abdominal hypertension following trauma laparotomy.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal Compartment Syndrome (ACS) is an uncommon but deleterious complication after trauma laparotomy. Early recognition of patients at risk of developing ACS is crucial for their outcome. The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics of patients who developed high-grade intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) (i.e., grade III or IV; intra-abdominal pressure, IAP >20 mm Hg) following an injury-related laparotomy versus those who did not (i.e., IAP ≤20 mm Hg). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of consecutive trauma patients admitted to a level 1 trauma centre in Australia between January 1, 1995 and January 31, 2010 was performed. A comparison was made between characteristics of patients who developed high-grade IAH following trauma laparotomy versus those who did not. RESULTS: A total of 567 patients (median age 31 years) were included in this study. Of these patients 10.2% (58/567) developed high-grade IAH of which 51.7% (30/58) developed ACS. Patients with high-grade IAH were older (p<0.001), had a higher Injury Severity Score (p<0.001), larger base deficit (p<0.001) and lower temperature at admission (p=0.011). In the first 24h of admission, patients with high-grade IAH received larger volumes of crystalloids (p<0.001), larger volumes of colloids (p<0.001) and more units of packed red blood cells (p<0.001). Following surgery prolonged prothrombin (p<0.001) and partial thromboplastin times (p<0.001) were seen. The patients with high-grade IAH suffered higher mortality rates (25.9% (15/58) vs. 12.2% (62/509); p=0.012). CONCLUSION: Of all patients who underwent a trauma laparotomy, 10.2% developed high-grade IAH, which increases the risk of mortality. Patients with acidosis, coagulopathy, and hypothermia were especially at risk. In these patients, the abdomen should be left open until adequate resuscitation has been achieved, allowing for definitive surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: This is a level III retrospective study.

Intra-abdominal hypertension in postoperative cardiac surgery patients.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate screening variables identifying patients at risk of developing intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) after cardiac surgery. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective observational study in a tertiary general intensive care unit. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and eight patients admitted to the ICU after cardiac surgery, with measurements of intraabdominal pressure (IAP). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Routinely collected clinical, physiological and biochemical variables were analysed with at least twice-daily measurements of IAP during the postoperative stay in the ICU. Variables available within 24 hours of admission to the ICU were evaluated against the incidence of IAH using logistic regression analysis to develop a set of screening criteria to identify patients at risk. RESULTS: Fifty patients (46%) developed IAH during their stay in the ICU and were ventilated for longer, needed more vasopressors and stayed one more day in the ICU. Plasma albumin concentration, central venous pressure, minimal abdominal perfusion pressure, cardiopulmonary and aortic cross-clamp times and the presence of abdominal distension within the first 24 hours were associated with the occurrence of IAH. A logistic regression model using these variables correctly identified 85% of patients who developed IAH. CONCLUSIONS: A set of screening criteria routinely available within the first 24 hours of admission to the ICU after cardiac surgery could correctly identify most patients at risk of IAH.

Timeliness in obtaining emergent percutaneous procedures in severely injured patients: how long is too long and should we create quality assurance guidelines?

BACKGROUND: Modern trauma care relies heavily on nonoperative, emergent percutaneous procedures, particularly in patients with splenic, pelvic and hepatic injuries. Unfortunately, specific quality measures (e.g., arrival to angiography times) have not been widely discussed. Our objective was to evaluate the time interval from arrival to initiation of emergent percutaneous procedures in severely injured patients. METHODS: All severely injured trauma patients (injury severity score [ISS] > 12) presenting to a level 1 trauma centre (2007-2010) were analyzed with standard statistical methodology. RESULTS: Among 60 severely injured patients (mean ISS 31, hypotension 18%, mortality 12%), the median time interval to the initiation of an angiographic procedure was 270 minutes. Of the procedures performed, 85% were therapeutic embolizations and 15% were diagnostic procedures. Splenic (median time 243 min, range 32-801 min) and pelvic (median time 278 min, range 153-466 min) embolizations accounted for 43% and 25% of procedures, respectively. The median embolization procedure duration for the spleen was 28 (range 15-153) minutes compared with 59 (range 34-171) minutes for the pelvis. Nearly 22% of patients required both an emergent percutaneous and subsequent operative procedure. Percutaneous therapy typically preceded open operative explorations. CONCLUSION: The time interval from arrival at the trauma centre to emergent percutaneous procedures varied widely. Improved processes emphasizing patient transition from the trauma bay to the angiography suite are essential. Discussion regarding the appropriate time to angiography is needed so this marker can be used as a quality outcome measure for all level 1 trauma centres.

CONTEXTE: De nos jours, en traumatologie, les soins reposent largement sur des interventions non chirurgicales percutanées d'extrême urgence, particulièrement chez les patients blessés à la rate, au bassin et au foie. Malheureusement, les indices de qualité spécifiques (p. ex., temps écoulé entre l'arrivée et l'angiographie) n'ont pas fait l'objet de discussions approfondies. Notre objectif était de mesurer le temps écoulé entre l'arrivée et l'instauration des interventions percutanées d'extrême urgence chez les grands blessés. MÉTHODES: Tous les grands polytraumatisés (indice de gravité des blessures [IGB] > 12) amenés dans un centre de traumatologie de niveau 1 (2007­2010) ont fait l'objet d'une analyse au moyen d'une méthodologie statistique standard. RÉSULTATS: Pour 60 patients gravement blessés (IGB moyen 31, hypotension 18 %, mortalité 12%), le temps écoulé avant l'instauration d'une intervention angio gra phique a été de 270 minutes. Parmi les interventions effectuées, 85% ont été des embolisations thérapeutiques et 15% des interventions diagnostiques. Les embolisations spléniques (temps écoulé médian 243 minutes, intervalle 32­801 minutes) et pelviennes (temps écoulé médian 278 minutes, intervalle 153­466 minutes) ont représenté 43% et 25% des interventions, respectivement. La durée médiane de l'intervention d'embolisation dans le cas de la rate a été de 28 (intervalle 15­153) minutes, contre 59 (intervalle 34­171) minutes pour les blessures touchant le bassin. Près de 22 % des patients ont eu besoin d'une intervention percutanée d'extrême urgence et d'une intervention chirurgicale par la suite. Les explorations chirurgicales ouvertes ont généralement été précédées d'un traitement percutané. CONCLUSION: Le temps écoulé entre l'arrivée au centre de traumatologie et les interventions percutanées d'extrême urgence varie beaucoup. Il faut, sans contredit, améliorer les processus en soulignant l'importance du transfert des patients de la salle de traumatologie à la salle d'angiographie et poursuivre la discussion sur le temps écoulé avant l'angiographie pour que ce marqueur puisse servir comme paramètre de mesure de la qualité dans tous les centres de traumatologie de niveau 1.

Utility of simultaneous interventional radiology and operative surgery in a dedicated suite for seriously injured patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In recent years, combined interventional radiology and operative suites have been proposed and are now becoming operational in select trauma centres. Given the infancy of this technology, this review aims to review the rationale, benefits and challenges of hybrid suites in the management of seriously injured patients. RECENT FINDINGS: No specific studies exist that investigate outcomes within hybrid trauma suites. Endovascular and interventional radiology techniques have been successfully employed in thoracic, abdominal, pelvic and extremity trauma. Although the association between delayed haemorrhage control and poorer patient outcomes is intuitive, most supporting scientific data are outdated. The hybrid suite model offers the potential to expedite haemorrhage control through synergistic operative, interventional radiology and resuscitative platforms. Maximizing the utility of these suites requires trained multidisciplinary teams, ergonomic and workplace considerations, as well as a fundamental paradigm shift of trauma care. This often translates into a more damage-control orientated philosophy. SUMMARY: Hybrid suites offer tremendous potential to expedite haemorrhage control in trauma patients. Outcome evaluations from trauma units that currently have operational hybrid suites are required to establish clearer guidelines and criteria for patient management.

A comparison of fluid instillation volumes to assess intra-abdominal pressure using Kron's methods.

BACKGROUND: Intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) measurement has become an important tool in the assessment of critically ill patients. The World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome consensus guidelines recommend using a maximum volume of 25 mL of sterile saline instilled into the bladder for intermittent IAP measurements. It is postulated that the volume of fluid instilled may have an impact on the estimation of IAP. METHODS: This study sought to compare measured bladder pressures after the instillation of 25, 10, and 0 mL volumes of sterile saline using measurement analysis. Measurement was performed using the modified Kron technique, and treatment allocation was applied by prospective, alternate patient treatment allocation. Transvesical IAP measurements were undertaken using volumes from 0 mL to 25 mL. Recordings were taken with the catheter unclamped, clamped, 10 mL instillation, and 25 mL instillation. This measurement analysis was conducted in a mixed intensive care unit at a Level I trauma hospital over a period of 14 weeks. IAP measurements were performed on 37 patients with varying disease processes using 25, 10, and 0 mL of sterile saline instilled into the bladder. RESULTS: Medical, surgical, and trauma patients were distributed equally across the treatment groups. Twenty-three patients were male, and the mean age was 58 years ± 18 years. The concordance correlation coefficient between 25 mL and 10 mL was 0.95. The concordance correlation coefficient between 25 mL and no fluid with an unclamped and clamped catheter was 0.55. CONCLUSION: In a general intensive care unit population, measured intra-urinary bladder pressure measurements using a volume of 10 mL fluid instillation provides comparable results to using 25 mL fluid. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic study, level II.

Alternatives to formal abdominal decompression.

Open abdominal decompression (OAD) is a potentially life-saving but arguably invasive treatment for intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and/or abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Although OAD has previously been considered the only therapeutic option for IAH/ACS, the application of comprehensive nonoperative medical management strategies to reduce elevated intra-abdominal pressure and restore organ perfusion has recently been shown to decrease progression to ACS and the need for OAD. Furthermore, a variety of minimally invasive therapies have been developed for the treatment of patients who would traditionally have required OAD. In general, these therapies are most applicable for patients with secondary rather than primary IAH leading to ACS.

Performance and consistency of care in admitted trauma patients: our next great opportunity in trauma care?

Few studies have prospectively analysed the delivery of care in trauma patients. This study undertook a prospective analysis of performance and consistency of care at a Level 1 trauma centre. A 3-month prospective study was undertaken of all admitted trauma patients at Liverpool Hospital. Data were collected on patient demographics, mechanism of injury, injury severity score (ISS), length of hospital stay, patient outcome and cause of death. Delivery of care was evaluated using 30 performance indicators and assessment of errors. Two hundred and thirty-six consecutive major trauma patients were studied. 73.3% were male, mean age 39 years. The main mechanism of injury was road trauma in 46.2%. Mean ISS was 12 and 64 patients had an ISS > or = 16. Error-free care was delivered in 145/236 (61.4%). There were 145 errors in 91 patients (38.6%). Errors in judgement and delays in diagnosis accounted for 56/145 (38.6%) and 48/145 (33.1%), respectively. Errors occurred most commonly in the Emergency Department (ED) (48.3%), and trainees from all specialties were responsible for 67.5% of errors. There were 25 near misses detected. Three patients developed major sequelae or complications from errors. One of 13 deaths was deemed potentially preventable. This study has shown that while 61.4% of admitted trauma patients receive optimal care, errors are frequent, resulting in a spectrum of outcomes from near misses to death. The majority of errors result from the activity of unsupervised trainees and relate to errors in judgement and delays in diagnosis. Clearly, there is room for improvement of the delivery of trauma care.

Intraabdominal hypertension and the abdominal compartment syndrome in burn patients.

Severe burns represent a devastating injury that induces profound systemic inflammation requiring large volumes of resuscitative fluids. The consequent massive swelling and peritoneal ascites raises intraabdominal pressures (IAP) to supraphysiologic levels commensurate with intraabdominal hypertension (IAH) and with the abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) if consistently associated with IAP >20 mmHg and associated with new organ failure. Severe burn injuries are an example of the secondary ACS (secondary ACS), wherein there has been no primary inciting intraperitoneal injury, yet severe IAH/ACS develops, setting the stage for progressive multiorgan dysfunction. These definitions along with practice management guidelines have recently been promulgated by the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome (WSACS) in an effort to standardize terminology and communication regarding IAH/ACS in critical care. It is currently unknown whether these syndromes are iatrogenic consequences of excessive or poorly managed fluid resuscitation or unavoidable sequelae of the primary injury. It occurs frequently with burns of >60% body surface area, especially with associated inhalational injury, delayed resuscitation, and abdominal wall injuries. IAH/ACS is often a hyperacute phenomenon that occurs within the first hours of admission and thereafter with any complication requiring aggressive fluid resuscitation. Despite a number of noninvasive management strategies, interventions such as percutaneous peritoneal drainage and, ultimately, decompressive laparotomy are often required once the ACS is established. Whether novel resuscitation strategies can avoid or minimize IAH/ACS is unproven at present and requires further study. Truly understanding postburn ACS may require further insights into the basic mechanisms of injury and resuscitation.

Time for a change in injury and trauma care delivery: a trauma death review analysis.

Safety and error reduction in medical care is crucial to the future of medicine. This study evaluates trauma patients dying at a level 1 trauma centre to determine the adequacy of care. All trauma deaths at a level 1 trauma centre between 1996 and 2003 were reviewed by an eight-member multidisciplinary death review panel. Errors in care were classified according to their location, nature, impact, outcome and whether the deaths were avoidable or non-avoidable. Avoidable deaths were categorized as potentially, probably and definitely avoidable. Between 1996 and 2003, there were 17 157 trauma admissions, including 307 trauma deaths. The mean patient age was 47.7 years +/- 24.8 years, mean injury severity score 38.1 +/- 19.6. Of all deaths, 69 (22.5%) were deemed avoidable. Of the avoidable deaths, 61 (88%) were potentially avoidable, 7 (10%) probably avoidable and 1 (1.4%) definitely avoidable. Avoidable deaths were associated with patients with increased age, lower injury severity score, admissions to intensive care unit, longer hospital stay and treatment by a non-trauma surgeon (P < 0.05). Of the 307 trauma deaths, 271 (89.3%) patients experienced a total of 1063 errors, an overall error rate of 3.5 per patient. The error rate in the non-avoidable group was 2.9 per patient and 5.3 per patient in the avoidable group (P < 0.0001). Most errors occurred in the resuscitation area. Age, severity of injury, hospital length of stay and care by a non-trauma surgeon are factors associated with avoidable deaths. A new approach to trauma and injury care is required.

Acute resuscitation of the unstable adult trauma patient: bedside diagnosis and therapy.

Traumatic injury remains the leading cause of potentially preventable death in Canadians under age 40 years. Although only a minority of patients present with hemodynamic instability, these patients have a significant chance of dying. The causes of instability must be recognized and corrected quickly by using a systematic approach. To allow key supportive interventions to be undertaken swiftly, it is more important to identify and prioritize systemic compromise than to confirm specific diagnoses. Most potentially preventable trauma death relates to airway obstruction, hemopneumothorax, intracranial hemorrhage and intracavitary bleeding. Definitive airway control should be assured as a first priority. Hemopneumothoraces are typically addressed by chest tube insertion, although thoracic exploration will occasionally be urgently required. Hemorrhage control is much more important than fluid resuscitation and mandates the earliest possible definitive management. Unstable patients nearing physiological exhaustion require abbreviated or "damage-control" surgical tactics. This should be recognized early in the resuscitation rather than late in an operative procedure. The management of expanding intracranial hemorrhage requires optimization of oxygenation, ventilation and circulatory support while urgent CT and expert neurosurgical care are provided. Polytrauma presenting with head injury challenges the most developed of trauma systems, necessitating thoughtful prioritization of care and taking into consideration local capabilities. Bedside trauma sonography is an evolving tool that complements the physical examination during an initial survey. Future breakthroughs in trauma resuscitation may involve procoagulant medications, imaging technology, circulatory assist techniques and the use of inflammatory modulators. The greatest future challenge in trauma care, though, will be the provision of basic organized resuscitative care to the global community.

Blunt cerebrovascular injury: an evaluation from a major trauma centre.

BACKGROUND: Blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI), although uncommon, is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality and remains poorly understood. This study was conducted to determine the pattern and outcome of BCVI at a major trauma centre. METHODS: A retrospective review of all trauma admissions between 1996 and 2004 at Liverpool Hospital, the major trauma service for south-west Sydney, was undertaken using the hospital's computerized trauma registry. RESULTS: Fourteen of the 7788 (0.18%) admitted blunt trauma patients sustained BCVI. Blunt carotid injury occurred in 10 of 14 and blunt vertebral injury occurred in 4 of 14 patients. Road trauma accounted for 9 of 14 cases. The median time to diagnosis was 2 days (range 1-45 days). The stroke rate was 36%, and the overall mortality was 29%. CONCLUSION: This study identified BCVI as a relatively infrequent occurrence but with significant mortality and morbidity rates. Practice guidelines for both the screening and management of this patient group need to be developed and introduced in this major trauma centre.