High-grade liver injuries with contrast extravasation managed initially with interventional radiology versus observation: A secondary analysis of a WTA multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: High-grade liver injuries with extravasation (HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav) are associated with morbidity/mortality. For low-grade injuries, an observation (OBS) first-strategy is beneficial over initial angiography (IR), however, it is unclear if OBS is safe for HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav. Therefore, we evaluated the management of HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav patients, hypothesizing IR patients will have decreased rates of operation and mortality. METHODS: HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav patients managed with initial OBS or IR were included. The primary outcome was need for operation. Secondary outcomes included liver-related complications (LRCs) and mortality. RESULTS: From 59 patients, 23 (39.0%) were managed with OBS and 36 (61.0%) with IR. 75% of IR patients underwent angioembolization, whereas 13% of OBS patients underwent any IR, all undergoing angioembolization. IR patients had an increased rate of operation (13.9% vs. 0%, p â€‹= â€‹0.049), but no difference in LRCs (44.4% vs. 43.5%) or mortality (5.6% vs. 8.7%) versus OBS patients (both p â€‹> â€‹0.05). CONCLUSION: Over 60% of patients were managed with IR initially. IR patients had an increased rate of operation yet similar rates of LRCs and mortality, suggesting initial OBS reasonable in appropriately selected HGLI â€‹+ â€‹Extrav patients.

Outcomes of vascular trauma associated with an evolution in the use of endovascular management.

OBJECTIVE: The availability of endovascular techniques has led to a paradigm shift in the management of vascular injury. Although previous reports showed trends towards the increased use of catheter-based techniques, there have been no contemporary studies of practice patterns and how these approaches differ by anatomic distributions of injury. The objective of this study is to provide a temporal assessment of the use of endovascular techniques in the management of torso, junctional (subclavian, axillary, iliac), and extremity injury and to evaluate any association with survival and length of stay. METHODS: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Prospective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment registry (PROOVIT) is the only large multicenter database focusing specifically on the management of vascular trauma. Patients in the AAST PROOVIT registry from 2013 to 2019 with arterial injuries were queried, and radial/ulnar, and tibial artery injuries were excluded. The primary aim was to evaluate the frequency in use of endovascular techniques over time and by body region. A secondary analysis evaluated the trends for junctional injuries and compared the mortality between those treated with open vs endovascular repair. RESULTS: Of the 3249 patients included, 76% were male, and overall treatment type was 42% nonoperative, 44% open, and 14% endovascular. Endovascular treatment increased an average of 2% per year from 2013 to 2019 (range, 17%-35%; R2 = .61). The use of endovascular techniques for junctional injuries increased by 5% per year (range, 33%-63%; R2 = .89). Endovascular treatment was more common for thoracic, abdominal, and cerebrovascular injuries, and least likely in upper and lower extremity injuries. Injury severity score was higher for patients receiving endovascular repair in every vascular bed except lower extremity. Endovascular repair was associated with significantly lower mortality than open repair for thoracic (5% vs 46%; P < .001) and abdominal injuries (15% vs 38%; P < .001). For junctional injuries, endovascular repair was associated with a non-statistically significant lower mortality (19% vs 29%; P = .099), despite higher injury severity score (25 vs 21; P = .003) compared with open repair. CONCLUSIONS: The reported use of endovascular techniques within the PROOVIT registry increased more than 10% over a 6-year period. This increase was associated with improved survival, especially for patients with junctional vascular injuries. Practices and training programs should account for these changes by providing access to endovascular technologies and instruction in the catheter-based skill sets to optimize outcomes in the future.

An observation-first strategy for liver injuries with "blush" on computed tomography is safe and effective.

INTRODUCTION: The management of liver injuries in hemodynamically stable patients is variable and includes primary treatment strategies of observation (OBS), angiography (interventional radiology [IR]) with angioembolization (AE), or operative intervention (OR). We aimed to evaluate the management of patients with liver injuries with active extravasation on computed tomography (CT) imaging, hypothesizing that AE will have more complications without improving outcomes compared with OBS. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, observational study. Patients who underwent CT within 2 hours after arrival with extravasation (e.g., blush) on imaging were included. Exclusion criteria included cirrhosis, nontraumatic hemorrhage, transfers from outside facilities, and pregnancy. No hemodynamic exclusion criteria were used. The primary outcome was liver-specific complications. Secondary outcomes include length of stay and mortality. Angioembolization patients were compared with patients treated without AE. Propensity score matching was used to match based on penetrating mechanism, liver injury severity, arrival vital signs, and early transfusion. RESULTS: Twenty-three centers enrolled 192 patients. Forty percent of patients (n = 77) were initially OBS. Eleven OBS patients (14%) failed nonoperative management and went to IR or OR. Sixty-one patients (32%) were managed with IR, and 42 (69%) of these had AE as an initial intervention. Fifty-four patients (28%) went to OR+/- IR. After propensity score matching (n = 34 per group), there was no difference in baseline characteristics between AE and OBS. The AE group experienced more complications with a higher rate of IR-placed drains for abscess or biloma (22% vs. 0%, p = 0.01) and an increased overall length of stay ( p = 0.01). No difference was noted in transfusions or mortality. CONCLUSION: Observation is highly effective with few requiring additional interventions. Angioembolization was associated with higher rate of secondary drain placement for abscesses or biloma. Given this, a trial of OBS and avoidance of empiric AE may be warranted in hemodynamically stable, liver-injured patient with extravasation on CT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level II.

Carotid endarterectomy is safe for octogenarians.

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has demonstrated superior results in stroke risk reduction for patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic high-grade carotid stenosis. However, this benefit has long been questioned for the elderly and high-risk populations. In the present study, we aimed to provide high-volume, single-institution data with long-term follow-up examining the risk factors for postoperative stroke and stroke-free survival stratified by age for asymptomatic and symptomatic patients undergoing CEA. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective review of 840 consecutive patients who had undergone CEA from 2011 to 2018 was performed, inclusive of both symptomatic and asymptomatic operative indications. The primary end point was perioperative stroke within 30 days of surgery. The secondary end points were late stroke, death, and myocardial infarction. Patients aged >80 years were compared with those aged <80 years to examine freedom from stroke and death. Statistically significant differences were defined as those with P < .05. RESULTS: A total of 840 patients were evaluated with a median follow-up of 416 ± 1244 days. Of the 840 patients, 499 (59%) were men, and 604 (72%) were White. The mean age was 72 ± 9 years, with 202 (24%) aged ≥80 years. CEA was performed for symptomatic disease in 305 patients (36%), of whom 143 (47%) had had strokes and 162 (53%) had had transient ischemic attacks. The overall 30-day postoperative stroke rate was 1.0% (eight patients; 0.6% for asymptomatic and 1.6% for symptomatic; P = .147). Compared with younger patients, octogenarians had had a similar stroke rate after CEA (1.5% vs 0.8%; P = .407). Hispanic race was an independent risk factor for postoperative stroke. White race and preoperative statin use both appeared to be protective. Kaplan-Meier survival curves demonstrated decreased a 5-year stroke-free survival in patients aged ≥80 years (P = .031). However, overall, the estimated 5-year survival was similar to the U.S. general population across both age groups. CONCLUSIONS: CEA for octogenarians is safe and effective for both symptomatic and asymptomatic populations with excellent 30-day outcomes and long-term survival mirroring that of the general population.

Lower extremity amputation protocol: a pilot enhanced recovery pathway for vascular amputees.

Vascular patients, an inherently older, frail population, account for >80% of major lower extremity amputations (transtibial or transfemoral) in the United States. Retrospective data have shown that early physical therapy and discharge to an acute rehabilitation facility decreases the postoperative length of stay (LOS) and expedites ambulation. In the present study, we sought to determine whether patients treated with the lower extremity amputation protocol (LEAP) will have improved outcomes. We performed a nonrandomized prospective study of vascular patients undergoing an amputation from January 2019 to February 2020. Patients who were nonambulatory or had undergone a previous contralateral major amputation were excluded. LEAP is a multidisciplinary team approach to the perioperative care of amputees using an outlined protocol. The prospective patients were compared with historic controls treated before the initiation of LEAP (January 2016 to December 2018). The primary outcomes included the postoperative LOS, time to receipt of a prosthesis, and time to ambulation. Of the 141 included patients, 130 were in the retrospective group and 11 in the LEAP group. The demographics and comorbidities were similar. All 11 LEAP patients had undergone a below-the-knee amputation, with 1 requiring revision to an above-the-knee amputation. Of the 130 retrospective patients, 122 (94%) had undergone a below-the-knee amputation, with 1 requiring revision to an above-the-knee amputation. The LEAP patients were more likely to be discharged to acute rehabilitation (100% vs 27%; P < .001), receive a prosthesis (100% vs 45%; P < .001), and ambulate with the prosthesis (100% vs 43%; P < .001). The LEAP patients had received physical therapy 2 days sooner than had the retrospective controls (P = .006) with a shorter postoperative LOS (3 days vs 6 days; P < .001). Of the patients who had received their prosthesis, the LEAP patients had received their prosthesis, on average, 2 months sooner than had the retrospective cohort (81 ± 39 days vs 137 ± 97 days, respectively; P = .002) and had ambulated with their prosthesis sooner (86 ± 53 days vs 146 ± 104 days, respectively; P = .002). No differences were found in the incidence of surgical site complications or unplanned readmissions between the two groups. The results from the present pilot study have demonstrated that the use of LEAP can significantly decrease postoperative LOS and expedite the time to independent ambulation with a prosthesis for vascular patients undergoing a major lower extremity amputation. These findings suggest a powerful ability to bridge the healthcare gap for this high-risk, underserved, and ethnically diverse population using a disease-specific standardized protocol.

Primary arterial closure after carotid endarterectomy is a safe and expeditious technique in appropriately selected patients.

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) remains a safe and durable operation for both symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis, however conflicting evidence exists on the benefit of patch angioplasty and its effects on post-operative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing CEA from 2011 to 2018 was performed. RESULTS: Of 851 patients, primary closure was performed in 277 (33%). Patients with primary closure were older (74 vs 72, p = 0.001), symptomatic (39% vs 34%, p = 0.024), and male (69% vs 31% p < 0.001), with a higher incidence of diabetes mellitus (47% vs 39%, p = 0.046) and ESRD (4% vs 2%, p = 0.015). Restenosis rates were similar (7% vs 8%, p = 0.67). Operative time was shorter for primary closure (87 ± 28 vs 102 ± 26 min, p < 0.001). There were no differences in 30-day ipsilateral stroke rates (1% vs 1%, p = 0.51) or stroke-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Primary arterial closure is safe and expeditious in appropriately selected high-risk patients.

Endovascular treatment of axillosubclavian arterial injuries is a safe alternative to open repair.

BACKGROUND: Injuries to the axillosubclavian arteries are rare, comprising 5% of all extremity trauma. This study aims to examine contemporary outcomes of traumatic axillosubclavian injuries. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on patients admitted with innominate, subclavian, and/or axillary artery injuries to a level 1 trauma center from 2011 to 2021. Patients undergoing endovascular repair were compared to those with open repair. RESULTS: Thirty two patients met inclusion criteria. Injuries were approached open in 22 (59%) cases and endovascular in 10 (27%). There was no difference in 30-day mortality or hospital length of stay between endovascular and open repair. Endovascular repairs had shorter operative times (1.9 vs 3.1 h, p = 0.009) and lower blood loss (72 vs 1662 mL, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair of axillosubclavian arterial injuries demonstrate similar outcomes to open repair. Significantly shorter operative times and lower blood loss suggest potential decreased morbidity.

Thrombotic complications after radiofrequency and cyanoacrylate endovenous ablation: Outcomes of a multicenter real-world experience.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) affects >40% of the U.S. population; thus, intervention for symptomatic venous disease comprises a large portion of many vascular practices. The treatment of superficial CVI has evolved from open surgical treatment to minimally invasive endovenous closure, including both thermal and nonthermal techniques. Thrombotic complications of thermal ablation have been well reported, with an overall complication rate of <2%. However, a paucity of high-powered, real-world data is available on the thrombotic outcomes of nonthermal techniques. In the present study, we compared the incidence of endovenous heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT) and endovenous glue-induced thrombosis (EGIT) in a large cohort of patients with CVI. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted at two tertiary-level institutions of patients who had undergone superficial endovenous ablation from 2018 to 2021. The patient demographics, comorbidities, and periprocedural outcomes were collected through medical record review. A Caprini risk assessment model score was assigned using the information available from the electronic medical records. The patients were categorized by procedure type (ClosureFast [Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, MN] radiofrequency ablation [RFA] vs VenaSeal [Medtronic Inc] cyanoacrylate glue closure [CAG]). The primary end point was the incidence of EHIT or EGIT. The secondary end point was the incidence of deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism. RESULTS: A total of 803 patients had undergone 1096 procedures during the study period. Their mean age was 62 ± 15 years, and 67% were women. Of the 1096 procedures, 700 were RFA and 396 were CAG procedures, with a combined closure rate of 98% by postprocedure duplex ultrasound at 7 days. The average Caprini score was 5.2 ± 1.8 (RFA, 5.0; vs CAG, 5.4; P < .001). The incidence of EHIT and EGIT was 1.9% and 1.3%, respectively (P = .57). The deep vein thrombosis rate was 0.1% in the RFA cohort and 0.3% in the CAG cohort (P = .81). A comparative analysis of thermal vs nonthermal techniques was performed. A univariate analysis of the risk factors for EHIT and EGIT revealed no significant factors predisposing to thrombotic events. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present study have demonstrated the safety of RFA and CAG closure techniques for CVI, with lower thrombotic rates than previously reported. Further work might help to identify how these results can be achieved across all venous ablative techniques for CVI, even for patient populations with advanced venous disease and possibly a greater than average risk of thrombotic events.

Nodular Regenerative Hyperplasia After Liver Transplant; It's All in the Presentation.

There is a paucity of data on nodular regenerative hyperplasia after liver transplant. We aim to define the clinical disease trajectory and identify predictors of outcome for this rare diagnosis. This is a retrospective review of postulated risk factors and outcome in patients with nodular regenerative hyperplasia. Patients were classified as having a late presentation if nodular regenerative hyperplasia was diagnosed > 48 months from transplant, and symptomatic if portal hypertensive symptoms were present. Forty-nine of 3,711 (1.3%) adult recipients developed nodular regenerative hyperplasia, and mortality was 32.7% with an average follow up of 84.6 months. The MELD-Na 6 months after diagnosis did not change significantly. Patients with symptomatic portal hypertension at the time of diagnosis had a significantly higher risk of mortality (51.8%) compared to patients with liver test abnormalities alone (10.5%). 44.9% of patients had no previously postulated risk factor. Anastomotic vascular complications do not appear to be the etiology in most patients. The results suggest the vast majority of patients presenting with liver test abnormalities alone have stable disease and excellent long term survival, in contrast to the 56.3% mortality seen in patients that present more than 48 months after LT with symptomatic portal hypertension at diagnosis.

Risk factors for stroke in penetrating carotid trauma-An analysis from the PROOVIT Registry.

BACKGROUND: Penetrating carotid injuries are associated with an up to 20% risk of stroke. This study evaluated patients in the American Association for Surgery of Trauma PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Trial, with the aim of determining factors associated with stroke and stroke or death. METHODS: Penetrating extracranial carotid injuries in the American Association for Surgery of Trauma PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Trial registry from 2012 to 2020 were queried. Isolated external carotid injuries were excluded. Patients with documented postinjury in-hospital stroke were compared with those without. Significant predictors (p < 0.1) for stroke and stroke or death on univariate analysis were included in multivariate analyses. RESULTS: One hundred two patients from 17 institutions were included. Mean age was 35 ± 18 years, and 80% were male. Average Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score on presentation was 9 ± 5, with an Injury Severity Score [ISS] of 22 ± 13. Operative management occurred in 51% of patients who were significantly more hypotensive (systolic blood pressure: 109 vs. 131 mm Hg; p = 0.015) with a lower initial pH (7.17 vs. 7.31; p = 0.001) and presented with hard signs of vascular injury (74% vs. 26%; p < 0.001). Overall stroke rate was 17% (23% operative vs. 10% nonoperative, p = 0.076). Rate of stroke or death was 27% (64% operative and 36% nonoperative). On multivariate analysis, lower GCS (p = 0.05) and completion angiography (p = 0.04) were associated with stroke. Likewise lower GCS (p = 0.015) and ISS (p = 0.04) were associated with stroke or death. CONCLUSION: Penetrating carotid trauma undergoing operative management had a stroke rate of 23%. Low GCS on arrival and need for completion angiography are independently associated with postinjury in-hospital stroke, whereas low GCS on arrival and ISS were associated with stroke or death. The ideal treatment strategy remains elusive, thus a dedicated multicenter study may help to achieve higher fidelity data on this rare but devastating injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological, Level III.

Delayed referral of venous ulcers increases resource usage.

OBJECTIVE: Venous insufficiency is often not readily recognized as a contributing etiology to nonhealing wounds by nonvascular surgery specialists, potentially delaying appropriate treatment to achieve wound healing and increasing healthcare costs. The objective of the present study was to understand the time and resources used before the definitive treatment of venous ulcers. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective medical record review of C6 patients undergoing radiofrequency saphenous and perforator vein ablation from May 2016 to January 2018 identified 56 patients with 67 diseased limbs. The numbers of inpatient, emergency department, and wound care visits and the intervals to vein ablation from the initial evaluation of the ulceration by a healthcare provider were collected. The demographics, comorbidities, previous venous interventions, wound characteristics, duplex ultrasound imaging, and available wound healing follow-up through July 2018 were assessed for all patients. RESULTS: For the 67 limbs examined, 588 total healthcare visits were performed for wound assessment before a referral to a vascular surgeon, with 413 visits at a wound care center (70% of all visits). Other specialty visits included emergency medicine (17.9% of limbs) and rheumatology (22.4% of limbs). Six patients (nine limbs) were admitted to inpatient services for treatment of their ulceration. Overall, the patients were seen an average of 8.6 ± 9.7 times for their ulcer with the wound center before determination of a contributing venous etiology and subsequent treatment. These visits translated to a median of 230 days (interquartile range, 86.5-1088 days) between the first identification of the ulcer by healthcare providers and subsequent accurate diagnosis and definitive treatment of their venous disease with radiofrequency saphenous and perforator vein ablation. After intervention, 18.64% of the limbs had healed at 1 month, 33.92% had healed at 3 months, 50% had healed at 6 months, and 82.92% had healed by 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: An earlier and accurate diagnosis of the venous contribution to ulcers and subsequent appropriate treatment of venous etiologies in wound formation by a vascular venous specialist could significantly improve healing and minimize resource usage.

Does autotransfusion from a contaminated trauma laparotomy field increase the risk of complications?

BACKGROUND: Autotransfusion (AT) in trauma laparotomy is limited by concern that enteric contamination (EC) increases complications, including infections. Our goal was to determine if AT use increases complications in trauma patients undergoing laparotomy with EC. METHODS: Trauma patients undergoing laparotomy from October 2011-November 2020 were reviewed. Patients were excluded if they did not receive blood in the operating room, did not have a full thickness hollow viscus injury, or died <24 h from admission. AT and non-AT patients were matched. Outcomes were compared. RESULTS: 185 patients were included, 60 received AT, and 46 pairs were matched. After matching, demographics were similar. No differences were noted in septic complications (33 vs 41%, p = 0.39), overall complications (59% vs 54%, p = 0.67), or mortality (13 vs 6%, p = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: AT use in contaminated trauma laparotomy fields was not associated with a higher rate of complications.

Mortality in hypotensive trauma patients requiring laparotomy is related to degree of hypotension and provides evidence for focused interventions.

BACKGROUND: Mortality in hypotensive patients requiring laparotomy is reported to be 46% and essentially unchanged in 20 years. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has been incorporated into resuscitation protocols in an attempt to decrease mortality, but REBOA can have significant complications and its use in this patient group has not been validated. This study sought to determine the mortality rate for hypotensive patients requiring laparotomy and to evaluate the mortality risk related to the degree of hypotension. Additionally, this study sought to determine if there was a presenting systolic blood pressure (SBP) that was associated with a sharp increase in mortality to target the appropriate patient group most likely to benefit from focused interventions such as REBOA. METHODS: The trauma registry at a level I trauma center was reviewed for patients undergoing emergent laparotomy from January 2007 to June 2020. Data included demographics, mechanism of injury, physiological data, Injury Severity Score, blood products transfused, and outcomes. Group comparisons were based on initial SBP (0 to 50 mm Hg, 60 to 69 mm Hg, 70 to 79 mm Hg, 80 to 89 mm Hg, and ≥90 mm Hg). RESULTS: During the study period, 52 016 trauma patients were treated and 1174 required laparotomy within 90 min of arrival; 424 had an initial SBP of <90 mm Hg. The overall mortality rate was 18%, but mortality increased as SBP decreased (≥90=9%, 80 to 89=20%, 70 to 79=21%, 60 to 69=48%, 0 to 59=66%). Mortality increased sharply with SBP of <70 mm Hg. DISCUSSION: Mortality rate increases with worsening hypotension and increases sharply with an SBP of <70 mm Hg. Further study on focused interventions such as REBOA should target this patient group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management, level III.

The need for perforator treatment after VenaSeal and ClosureFast endovenous saphenous vein closure in CEAP 6 patients.

OBJECTIVE: The authors have previously demonstrated that VenaSeal (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, Minn) adhesive, compared with radiofrequency ablation (RFA, ClosureFast; Medtronic, Inc), in treatment of refluxing saphenous veins in CEAP 6 limbs, results in shorter healing times of venous ulcers. The authors hypothesize that the longer treated length possible with VenaSeal's nonthermal modality may affect the number of critical refluxing perforators contributing to the nonhealing wound. This follow-up study compares the need for follow-up treatment of perforator veins after saphenous vein treatment with either radiofrequency ablation (ClosureFast RFA) or adhesive closure (VenaSeal). METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective review of CEAP 6 patients who had closure of their saphenous veins from 2015 to 2020 was conducted. Patients who underwent follow-up treatment of perforator veins were grouped according to their method of initial management of their saphenous veins. The primary end point was incidence of a perforator procedure after ClosureFast or VenaSeal ablation. Secondary end points included sclerotherapy to facilitate wound healing. Bivariate analysis used the χ2 test, Fisher exact test, t-test, and Wilcoxon rank sum test. A P value of <.05 defined statistical significance. RESULTS: There were 119 CEAP 6 patients with saphenous closure: 51 limbs treated with VenaSeal and 68 with RFA. Median follow-up was 105 days (interquartile range: 44, 208). All limbs achieved wound healing during the study period. Mean time to wound healing post index procedure was shorter for VenaSeal than RFA (72 vs 293.8 days, P > .0009), as was median time (43 vs 104 days, P = .001). More limbs treated with RFA had previous known deep vein thrombosis (29% vs 10%, P = .009), deep venous insufficiency (82% vs 51%, P = .0003), and perforator reflux (57% vs 29%, P = .002). Limbs with identified follow-up perforator reflux treated with RFA had a higher prevalence of initially treated saphenous veins with RFA compared with those treated with VenaSeal (49% vs 27%, P = .003). There was no difference between the methods of vein closure and use of concurrent sclerotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: ClosureFast and VenaSeal are both effective and safe modalities of saphenous ablation, but VenaSeal treatment was associated with less perforator RFA intervention.

Contemporary outcomes of traumatic popliteal artery injury repair from the popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injury in trauma study.

OBJECTIVE: Traumatic popliteal artery injuries are associated with the greatest risk of limb loss of all peripheral vascular injuries, with amputation rates of 10% to 15%. The purpose of the present study was to examine the outcomes of patients who had undergone operative repair for traumatic popliteal arterial injuries and identify the factors independently associated with limb loss. METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective review of all patients with traumatic popliteal artery injuries from 2007 to 2018 was performed. All the patients who had undergone operative repair of popliteal arterial injuries were included in the present analysis. The patients who had required a major lower extremity amputation (transtibial or transfemoral) were compared with those with successful limb salvage at the last follow-up. The significant predictors (P < .05) for amputation on univariate analysis were included in a multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients from 11 institutions were included in the present analysis. The median age was 32 years (interquartile range, 21-40 years), and 79% were men. The median follow-up was 72 days (interquartile range, 20-366 days). The overall major amputation rate was 13%. Primary repair had been performed in 17% of patients, patch repair in 2%, and interposition or bypass in 81%. One patient had undergone endovascular repair with stenting. The overall 1-year primary patency was 89%. Of the patients who had lost primary patency, 46% ultimately required major amputation. Early loss (within 30 days postoperatively) of primary patency was five times more frequent for the patients who had subsequently required amputation. On multivariate regression, the significant perioperative factors independently associated with major amputation included the initial POPSAVEIT (popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injury in trauma) score, loss of primary patency, absence of detectable immediate postoperative pedal Doppler signals, and lack of postoperative antiplatelet therapy. Concomitant popliteal vein injury, popliteal injury location (P1, P2, P3), injury severity score, and tibial vs popliteal distal bypass target were not independently associated with amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Traumatic popliteal artery injuries are associated with a significant rate of major amputation. The preoperative POPSAVEIT score remained independently associated with amputation after including the perioperative factors. The lack of postoperative pedal Doppler signals and loss of primary patency were highly associated with major amputation. The use of postoperative antiplatelet therapy was inversely associated with amputation, perhaps indicating a protective effect.

Thrombotic complications of superficial endovenous ablation: a contemporary review of thermal and non-thermal techniques.

Endovenous ablation has become the preferred means to treat superficial venous insufficiency. Ablative technologies have evolved to include a variety of both thermal and non-thermal techniques. The reported thrombotic complications of endovenous heat induced thrombosis (EHIT) and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) associated with thermal techniques are low (<2% overall). However, the limited data on newer non-thermal technologies suggest these modalities may have thrombotic complication rates upwards of 6%. Additionally, the pathophysiology of thrombotic events related to mechanochemical ablative techniques may differ from EHIT, and thus, may have different implications for management. Described is a case report of a stroke after cyanoacrylate ablation of the great saphenous vein, and a review of the current literature reporting the thrombotic complications associated with current thermal and non-thermal techniques. There exists a need for high-volume studies on newer ablative techniques to fully understand their associated thrombotic complications. This review highlights the need for a comprehensive classification system and standard treatment algorithm encompassing of thrombotic complications associated with both thermal and non-thermal ablative techniques.

Popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injuries in trauma study.

OBJECTIVE: Traumatic popliteal vascular injuries are associated with the highest risk of limb loss of all peripheral vascular injuries. A method to evaluate the predictors of amputation is needed because previous scores could not be validated. In the present study, we aimed to provide a simplified scoring system (POPSAVEIT [popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injuries in trauma]) that could be used preoperatively to risk stratify patients with traumatic popliteal vascular injuries for amputation. METHODS: A review of patients sustaining traumatic popliteal artery injuries was performed. Patients requiring amputation were compared with those with limb salvage at the last follow-up. Of these patients, 80% were randomly assigned to a training group for score generation and 20% to a testing group for validation. Significant predictors of amputation (P < .1) on univariate analysis were included in a multivariable analysis. Those with P < .05 on multivariable analysis were assigned points according to the relative value of their odds ratios (ORs). Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to determine low- vs high-risk scores. An area under the curve of >0.65 was considered adequate for validation. RESULTS: A total of 355 patients were included, with an overall amputation rate of 16%. On multivariate regression analysis, the risk factors independently associated with amputation in the final model were as follows: systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg (OR, 3.2; P = .027; 1 point), associated orthopedic injury (OR, 4.9; P = .014; 2 points), and a lack of preoperative pedal Doppler signals (OR, 5.5; P = .002; 2 points [or 1 point for a lack of palpable pedal pulses if Doppler signal data were unavailable]). A score of ≥3 was found to maximize the sensitivity (85%) and specificity (49%) for a high risk of amputation. The receiver operating characteristic curve for the validation group had an area under the curve of 0.750, meeting the threshold for score validation. CONCLUSIONS: The POPSAVEIT score provides a simple and practical method to effectively stratify patients preoperatively into low- and high-risk major amputation categories.

A comparison of cyanoacrylate glue and radiofrequency ablation techniques in the treatment of superficial venous reflux in CEAP 6 patients.

OBJECTIVE: Venous leg ulcers (CEAP [clinical, etiologic, anatomic, pathophysiologic] class 6) represent the most severe form of chronic venous insufficiency. As closure techniques for superficial venous reflux evolve, direct outcome comparisons of treatments are integral, because many studies have already demonstrated that early endovenous intervention improves wound healing. The present study compared the rates of venous wound healing between two techniques of superficial vein closure: ClosureFast radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and adhesive closure (VenaSeal; both Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). METHODS: We performed a multi-institutional retrospective review of all patients with CEAP class 6 who had undergone closure of their truncal veins from 2015 to 2020. Patients undergoing ClosureFast RFA were compared with those undergoing VenaSeal adhesive closure. The primary endpoint was the interval to wound healing from initial vein closure. The secondary endpoints included ulcer recurrence and infection rates. Bivariate analysis involved the χ2, Fisher exact, t, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Multivariate linear regression analysis was used to examine the factors affecting the time to wound healing in the most predictive model. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05. RESULTS: A total of 119 patients with CEAP 6 were included, with a median follow-up of 105 days (interquartile range, 44-208 days). Of the 119 limbs, 68 were treated with RFA and 51 with VenaSeal. Significantly more patients undergoing RFA had had a history of deep vein thrombosis (29% vs 10%; P = .01) and deep venous reflux (82% vs 51%; P = .003). The VenaSeal patients were older (72 years vs 65 years; P = .02) with a greater rate of coronary artery disease (16% vs 37%; P = .01). The median time to wound healing after the procedure was significantly shorter for VenaSeal than for RFA (43 vs 104 days; P = .001). Two RFA patients developed a postprocedure infection. The ulcer recurrence rate was 19.3% (22.1% for RFA vs 13.7% for VenaSeal; P = .25). On multivariate analysis, the treatment modality was the only significant predictor of the time to wound healing. When stratified by ulcer size as small (<3 cm2) vs large (>3 cm2), VenaSeal closure healed the wounds significantly faster for all ulcers. CONCLUSIONS: ClosureFast and VenaSeal are both safe and effective treatments to eliminate truncal venous insufficiency. VenaSeal showed a superior time to wound healing compared with ClosureFast in both large and small ulcers.

Admission base deficit is superior to lactate in identifying shock and resuscitative needs in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Base Deficit (BD) and lactate have been used as indicators of shock and resuscitation. This study was done to evaluate the utility of BD and lactate in identifying shock and resuscitative needs in trauma patients. METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed from 3/2014-12/2018. Data included demographics, admission systolic BP, ISS, BD, lactate, blood transfusion, and outcomes. BD and lactate were modeled continuously and categorically and compared. RESULTS: 2271 patients were included. BD and lactate were moderately correlated (r2 = 0.63 p < 0.001). On univariate regression, BD and lactate were associated with transfusion requirement and mortality (p < 0.001), but on multivariate regression, only BD was associated with transfusion requirement and mortality (OR = 1.2, p < 0.001; OR = 1.1, p < 0.001, respectively). BD discriminated better than lactate for hypotension, higher ISS, increased transfusion requirements and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Admission BD and lactate levels are correlated following injury, but BD is superior to lactate in identifying shock, resuscitative needs and mortality in severely injured trauma patients.

Incidence of hyponatremia in patients given levetiracetam vs. phenytoin for early posttraumatic seizure prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Levetiracetam and phenytoin are comparable for acute posttraumatic seizure(PTS) prophylaxis. Levetiracetam-induced hyponatremia has been reported in non-trauma patients. We studied hyponatremia in posttraumatic intracranial hemorrhage(ICH) patients receiving either drug. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients with ICH receiving PTS prophylaxis was performed. Patients were categorized by degree of sodium nadir: normal, mild, moderate, or severe, and analyzed by levetiracetam versus phenytoin. Patients were matched 2:1 regarding age and injury severity score(ISS). Incidence and treatment for hyponatremia was examined. RESULTS: 1735 ICH patients received PTS prophylaxis over an 8-year period. After exclusions and matching, there were 282 phenytoin and 564 levetiracetam patients. Age, ISS and initial sodium were comparable between the matched cohorts. There was no clinically significant difference in the rate or degree of hyponatremia. Treatment was more common in levetiracetam patients. DISCUSSION: There was a small but clinically insignificant difference in the incidence of hyponatremia in traumatic ICH patients receiving levetiracetam vs. phenytoin for PTS prophylaxis. There was an increased rate of intervention for hyponatremia in the levetiracetam group, possibly due to a coincidental preventive paradigm shift.