Intraoperative factors associated with unplanned return to the operating room after emergent hemorrhage control surgery.

BACKGROUND: Unplanned return to the operating room (uROR) is associated with worse outcomes and increased mortality. Little is known regarding intraoperative factors associated with uROR after emergent surgery in trauma patients. The objective of this study was to identify intraoperative factors associated with uROR after emergent hemorrhage control procedures in bleeding trauma patients. METHODS: We used anesthetic record of intraoperative management to perform a retrospective study (2017-2022) of bleeding trauma patients who were taken for an emergent hemorrhage control operation. RESULTS: A total of 225 patients met the inclusion criteria, 46 (20%) had uROR, and 181 (80%) did not. While there was no difference in demographics, mechanism, admission physiology, or time from emergency department to operating room, the uROR patients had a higher Injury Severity Score (30 vs. 25, p = 0.007). While there was no difference in volume of crystalloid infused (3,552 ± 2,279 mL vs. 2,977 ± 2,817 mL, p = 0.20), whole blood (2.2 ± 0.9 vs. 2.0 ± 0.5, p = 0.20), or platelets (11.6 ± 8.6 vs. 9.2 ± 9.0, p = 0.14), the uROR group received more packed red blood cells (11.5 ± 10.6 vs. 7.8 ± 7.5, p = 0.006) and plasma (9.6 ± 8.3 vs. 6.5 ± 6.6, p = 0.01), and more uROR patients received ≥10 U of packed red blood cells (48% vs. 27%, p = 0.006). Damage-control surgery (DCS) was more common in uROR patients (78% vs. 45%, p < 0.0001). After logistic regression, ≥10 U of packed cells in the operating room (4.3 [1.5-12.8], p = 0.009), crystalloid (1.0 [1.0-1.001], p = 0.009), International Normalized Ratio (INR) (7.6 [1.3-45.7], p = 0.03), and DCS (5.7 [1.7-19.1], p = 0.005) were independently associated with uROR. CONCLUSION: Massive transfusion, crystalloid resuscitation, persistent coagulopathy, and DCS are the most significant risk factors for uROR. During hemorrhage control surgery in bleeding trauma patients who receive ≥10 U of blood, providers must maintain a keen focus on minimizing crystalloid and ongoing balanced resuscitation, particularly during damage-control procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective/Descriptive; Level IV.

Principles and Practice in Pediatric Vascular Trauma: Part 2: Fundamental Vascular Principles, Pediatric Nuance, and Follow-up Strategies.

As of 2020, penetrating injuries became the leading cause of death among children and adolescents ages 1-19 in the United States. For those patients who survive and receive advanced medical care, vascular injuries are a significant cause of morbidity and trigger notable trauma team angst. Moreover, penetrating injuries can lead to life-threatening hemorrhage and/or limb-threatening ischemia if not addressed promptly. Vascular injury management demands timely and unique expertise, particularly for pediatric patients. In part 1 of this review, we discussed the scope and extent of the epidemic of traumatic vascular injuries in pediatric patients, reviewed current evidence and outcomes, discussed various challenges and advantages of a myriad of existing team structures, and outlined potential outcome targets and solutions. However, in order to optimize care for pediatric vascular trauma, we must also understand the fundamental best practice principles, surgical options and approaches, medical management, and recommendations for ongoing, outpatient follow-up. In part 2, we will address the best evidence, combined with expert consensus, regarding strategies for diagnosing, managing, and ongoing follow-up of vascular trauma, with particular focus on the nuances that define the unique approaches to pediatric patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: n/a.

Principles and Practice in Pediatric Vascular Trauma: Part 1: Scope of Problem, Team Structure, Multidisciplinary Dynamics, and Solutions.

As of 2020, penetrating injuries became the leading cause of death among children and adolescents ages 1-19 in the United States. For the patients who initially survive and receive advanced medical care, vascular injuries are a significant cause of morbidity and additionally trigger notable trauma team angst. Moreover, penetrating injuries can lead to life-threatening hemorrhage and/or limb-threatening ischemia if not addressed promptly. Vascular injury management demands timely and unique expertise, particularly for pediatric patients. As the frequency of vascular injuries requiring operative management increases, it becomes clear that an ad hoc approach is not ideal. An integrated team would provide the best approach for rapid hemorrhage control and revascularization, but the structure of vascular response teams at children's hospitals is highly variable. In part 1 of this review, we will evaluate the scope and extent of the epidemic of traumatic vascular injuries in pediatric patients, review current evidence and outcomes, discuss various challenges and advantages of different team structures, and outline potential outcome targets and pediatric vascular trauma response solutions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: n/a.

Out with the old, in with the new? The revised AAST grading schema better predicts splenic salvage but not splenectomy.

BACKGROUND: The revised American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) organ injury scale (OIS) for splenic injury incorporates radiologic features but the implications of this are unknown. We hypothesized that the revised AAST-OIS would better predict outcomes. METHODS: Patients with a blunt splenic injury admitted to a Level I trauma center were reviewed from 2016 to 2021. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for splenectomy were calculated for high-grade injuries (AAST-OIS grades IV-V) using both schemas. RESULTS: Of the 852 patients analyzed, 48.5% were observed, 24.6% were embolized, and the remaining underwent operative intervention. The median AAST-OIS increased from II to III (p â€‹< â€‹0.01). Sensitivity (38.0% vs. 73.7%) and NPV (80.9% vs. 88.2%) for splenectomy increased for high-grade injuries but specificity (93.5% vs 70.1%) and PPV (67.5% vs 46.7%) decreased. CONCLUSION: The revised AAST-OIS better predicted splenic salvage but is less accurate at predicting need for splenectomy.

Outcomes Associated With Aortic Balloon Occlusion Time in Patients With Zone 1 Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta.

INTRODUCTION: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has the potential to cause clinically relevant systemic ischemic burden with long durations of aortic occlusion (AO). We aimed to examine the association between balloon occlusion time and clinical complications and mortality outcomes in patients undergoing zone 1 REBOA. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acuteregistry patients with Zone 1 REBOA between 2013 and 2022 was performed. Patients with cardiopulmonary resuscitation on arrival or who did not survive past the emergency department were excluded. Total AO times were categorized as follows: <15 min, 15-30 min, 31-60 min, and >60 min. Clinical and procedural variables and in-hospital outcomes were compared across groups using bivariate and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: There were 327 cases meeting inclusion criteria (n = 51 < 15 min, 83 15-30 min, 98 31-60 min, and 95 > 60 min, respectively). AO >60 min had higher admission lactate (8 ± 6; P = 0.004) compared to all other time groups, but injury severity score, heart rate, and systolic blood pressure were similar. Group average times from admission to definitive hemorrhage control ranged from 82 to 103 min and were similar across groups (85 min in AO >60 group). Longer AO times were associated with greater red blood cell, fresh frozen plasma transfusions (P < 0.001), and vasopressor use (P = 0.001). Mortality was greatest in the >60 min group (73%) versus the <15 min, 15-30 min, and 31-60 min groups (53%, 43%, and 45%, P < 0.001). With adjustment for injury severity score, systolic blood pressure, and lactate, AO >60 min had greater mortality (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6-9.4; P < 0.001) than other AO duration groups. Among 153 survivors, AO >60 min had a higher rate of multiple organ failure (15.4%) compared to the other AO durations (0%, 0%, and 4%, P = 0.02). There were no differences in amputation rates (0.7%) or spinal cord ischemia (1.4%). acute kidney injury was seen in 41% of >60 min versus 21%, 27%, and 33%, P = 0.42. CONCLUSIONS: Though greater preocclusion physiologic injury may have been present, REBOA-induced ischemic insult was correlated with poor patient outcomes, specifically, REBOA inflation time >60 min had higher rates of mortality and multiple organ failure. Minimizing AO duration should be prioritized, and AO should not delay achieving definitive hemostasis. Partial REBOA may be a solution to extend safe AO time and deserves further study.

Consensus on resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in civilian (prehospital) trauma care: A Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) could prevent lethal exsanguination and support cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In prehospital trauma and medical emergency settings, a small population with high mortality rates could potentially benefit from early REBOA deployment. However, its use in these situations remains highly disputed. Since publication of the first Delphi study on REBOA, in which consensus was not reached on all addressed topics, new literature has emerged. The aim of this study was to establish consensus on the use and implementation of REBOA in civilian prehospital settings for noncompressible truncal hemorrhage and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest as well as for various in-hospital settings. METHODS: A Delphi study consisting of three rounds of questionnaires was conducted based on a review of recent literature. REBOA experts with different medical specialties, backgrounds, and work environments were invited for the international panel. Consensus was reached when a minimum of 75% of panelists responded to a question and at least 75% (positive) or less than 25% (negative) of these respondents agreed on the questioned subject. RESULTS: Panel members reached consensus on potential (contra)indications, physiological thresholds for patient selection, the use of ultrasound and practical, and technical aspects for early femoral artery access and prehospital REBOA. CONCLUSION: The international expert panel agreed that REBOA can be used in civilian prehospital settings for temporary control of noncompressible truncal hemorrhage, provided that personnel are properly trained and protocols are established. For prehospital REBOA and early femoral artery access, consensus was reached on (contra)indications, physiological thresholds and practical aspects. The panel recommends the initiation of a randomized clinical trial investigating the use of prehospital REBOA for noncompressible truncal hemorrhage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level V.

A pseudo-dilemma: Are we over-diagnosing and over-treating traumatic splenic intraparenchymal pseudoaneurysms?

BACKGROUND: Splenic embolization for traumatic vascular abnormalities in stable patients is a common practice. We hypothesize that modern contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) over diagnoses posttraumatic splenic vascular lesions, such as intraparenchymal pseudoaneurysms (PSA) that may not require embolization. METHODS: We reviewed the experience at our high-volume center with endovascular management of blunt splenic injuries from January 2016 to December 2021. Multidisciplinary review was used to compared initial CT findings with subsequent angiography, analyzing management and outcomes of identified vascular lesions. RESULTS: Of 853 splenic injuries managed overall during the study period, 255 (29.9%) underwent angiography of the spleen at any point during hospitalization. Vascular lesions were identified on 58% of initial CTs; extravasation (12.2%) and PSA (51.0%). Angiography was performed a mean of 22 hours after admission, with 38% done within 6 hours. Embolization was performed for 90.5% (231) of patients. Among the 130 patients with PSA on initial CT, 36 (27.7%) had no visible lesion on subsequent angiogram. From the 125 individuals who did not have a PSA identified on their initial CT, 67 (54%) had a PSA seen on subsequent angiography. On postembolization CT at 48 hours to 72 hours, persistently perfused splenic PSAs were seen in 41.0% (48/117) of those with and 22.2% (2/9) without embolization. Only one of 24 (4.1%) patients with PSA on angiography observed without embolization required delayed splenectomy, whereas 6.9% (16/231) in the embolized group had splenectomy at a mean of 5.5 ± 4 days after admission. CONCLUSION: There is a high rate of discordance between CT and angiographic identification of splenic PSAs. Even when identified at angiogram and embolized, close to half will remain perfused on follow-up imaging. These findings question the use of routine angioembolization for all splenic PSAs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Tranexamic acid is not associated with a higher rate of thrombotic-related reintervention after major vascular injury repair.

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid (TXA) is associated with lower mortality and transfusion requirements in trauma patients, but its role in thrombotic complications associated with vascular repairs remains unclear. We investigated whether TXA increases the risk of thrombosis-related technical failure (TRTF) in major vascular injuries (MVI). METHODS: The PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment (PROOVIT) registry was queried from 2013 to 2022 for MVI repaired with an open or endovascular intervention. The relationship between TXA administration and TRTF was examined. RESULTS: The TXA group (n = 297) had higher rates of hypotension at admission (33.6% vs. 11.5%, p < 0.001), need for continuous vasopressors (41.4% vs. 18.4%, p < 0.001), and packed red blood cell transfusion (3.2 vs. 2.0 units, p < 0.001) during the first 24 hours compared with the non-TXA group (n = 1941), although demographics, injury pattern, and interventions were similar. Cryoprecipitate (9.1% vs. 2%, p < 0.001), and anticoagulant administration during the intervention (32.7% vs. 43.8%, p < 0.001) were higher in the TXA group; there was no difference in the rate of factor VII use between groups (1% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.485). Thrombosis-related technical failure was not different between the groups (6.3% vs. 3.8 p = 0.141) while the rate of immediate need for reoperation (10.1% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.006) and overall reoperation (11.4% vs. 7%, p = 0.009) was significantly higher in the TXA group on univariate analysis. There was no significant association between TXA and a higher rate of immediate need for reintervention (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.88; p = 0.465), overall reoperation rate (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.82-2.17; p = 0.249) and thrombotic events in a repaired vessel (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.60-1.92; p = 0.806) after adjusting for type of injury, vasopressor infusions, blood product and anticoagulant administration, and hemodynamics. CONCLUSION: Tranexamic acid is not associated with a higher risk of thrombosis-related technical failure in traumatic injuries requiring major vascular repairs. Further prospective studies to examine dose-dependent or time-dependent associations between TXA and thrombotic events in MVIs are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Arterial Access Complications Following Percutaneous Femoral Access in 24-Hour Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta Survivors.

INTRODUCTION: With the use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) comes the potential for vascular access site complications (VASCs) and limb ischemic sequelae. We aimed to determine the prevalence of VASC and associated clinical and technical factors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of 24-h survivors undergoing percutaneous REBOA via the femoral artery in the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute care surgery registry between Oct 2013 and Sep 2021 was performed. The primary outcome was VASC, defined as at least one of the following: hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, arterial stenosis, or the use of patch angioplasty for arterial closure. Associated clinical and procedural variables were examined. Data were analyzed using Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney-U tests, and linear regression. RESULTS: There were 34 (7%) cases with VASC among 485 meeting inclusion criteria. Hematoma (40%) was the most common, followed by pseudoaneurysm (26%) and patch angioplasty (21%). No differences in demographics or injury/shock severity were noted between cases with and without VASC. The use of ultrasound (US) was protective (VASC, 35% versus no VASC, 51%; P = 0.05). The VASC rate in US cases was 12/242 (5%) versus 22/240 (9.2%) without US. Arterial sheath size >7 Fr was not associated with VASC. US use increased over time (R2 = 0.94, P < 0.001) with a stable rate of VASC (R2 = 0.78, P = 0.61). VASC were associated with limb ischemia (VASC, 15% versus no VASC, 4%; P = 0.006) and arterial bypass procedures (VASC 3% versus no VASC 0%; P < 0.001) but amputation was uncommon (VASC, 3% versus no VASC, 0.4%; P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous femoral REBOA had a 7% VASC rate which was stable over time. VASC are associated with limb ischemia but need for surgical intervention and/or amputation is rare. The use of US-guided access appears to be protective against VASC and is recommended for use in all percutaneous femoral REBOA procedures.

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.

Time to Splenic Angioembolization Does Not Impact Splenic Salvage Rates.

We aimed to determine whether early (<6 hours) vs delayed (≥6 hours) splenic angioembolization (SAE) after blunt splenic trauma (grades II-V) impacted splenic salvage rates at a level I trauma center (2016-2021). The primary outcome was delayed splenectomy by timing of SAE. Mean time of SAE was determined for those who failed vs those who had successful splenic salvage. We retrospectively identified 226 individuals, from which 76 (33.6%) were in the early group and 150 (66.4%) were in the delayed group. The early group had higher AAST grade, greater amount of hemoperitoneum on CT, and 3.9x greater odds of undergoing delayed splenectomy (P = .046). Time to embolization was shorter in the group that failed splenic salvage (5 vs 10 hours, P = .051). On multivariate analysis, timing of SAE had no effect on splenic salvage. This study supports performing SAE on an urgent rather than emergent basis in stable patients after blunt splenic injury.

Surveillance Imaging Associated With Delayed Splenectomy in High-Grade Blunt Splenic Trauma.

This retrospective, single-site study at a level I trauma center (2016-2021) sought to determine whether repeat CT had an impact on clinical decision making after splenic angioembolization following blunt splenic trauma (grades II-V). The primary outcome was need for intervention after subsequent imaging (defined as angioembolization and/or splenectomy) by high- or low-grade injury. Of the 400 individuals examined, 78 (19.5%) underwent intervention after repeat CT, from which 17% were in the low-grade group (grades II and III) and 22% were in the high-grade group (grades IV and V). Individuals in the high-grade group were 3.6 times more likely to undergo delayed splenectomy than those in the low-grade group (P = .006). Delayed intervention after surveillance imaging in blunt splenic injury is driven mostly by the identification of new vascular lesions and leads to greater rates of splenectomy in high-grade injuries. Surveillance imaging should be considered for all AAST injury grades II or higher.

Is Chest X-Ray a Reliable Screening Tool for Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury? Results from the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma/Aortic Trauma Foundation Prospective Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury Registry.

BACKGROUND: Traditional teaching continues to espouse the value of initial trauma chest x-ray (CXR) as a screening tool for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI). The ability of this modality to yield findings that reliably correlate with grade of injury and need for subsequent treatment, however, requires additional multicenter prospective examination. We hypothesized that CXR is not a reliable screening tool, even at the highest grades of BTAI. STUDY DESIGN: The Aortic Trauma Foundation/American Association for the Surgery of Trauma prospective BTAI registry was used to correlate initial CXR findings to the Society for Vascular Surgery injury grade identified with computed tomographic angiography. RESULTS: We analyzed 708 confirmed BTAI injuries with recorded CXR findings and subsequent computed tomographic angiography injury characterization from February 2015 to August 2021. The presence of any of the classic CXR findings was observed in only 57.6% (408 of 708) of injuries, with increasing presence correlating with advanced Society for Vascular Surgery BTAI grade (39.1% [75 of 192] of grade 1; 55.6% [50 of 90] of grade 2; 65.2% [227 of 348] of grade 3; and 71.8% [56 of 78] of grade 4). The most consistent single finding identified was widened mediastinum, but this was only present in 27.7% of all confirmed BTAIs and only 47.4% of G4 injuries (7.8%% of grade 1, 23.3%, of grade 2, 35.3% of grade 3, and 47.4% of grade 4). CONCLUSIONS: CXR is not a reliable screening tool for the detection of BTAI, even at the highest grades of injury. Further investigations of specific high-risk criteria for screening that incorporate imaging, mechanism, and physiologic findings are warranted.

Contemporary Management and Outcomes of Injuries to the Inferior Vena Cava: A Prospective Multicenter Trial From PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Injuries to the inferior vena cava (IVC), while uncommon, have a high mortality despite modern advances. The goal of this study is to describe the diagnosis and management in the largest available prospective data set of vascular injuries across anatomic levels of IVC injury. METHODS: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment (PROOVIT) registry was queried from November 2013 to January 2019. Demographics, diagnostic modalities, injury patterns, and management strategies were recorded and analyzed. Comparisons between anatomic levels were made using non-parametric Wilcoxon rank-sum statistics. RESULTS: 140 patients from 19 institutions were identified; median age was 30 years old (IQR 23-41), 75% were male, and 62% had penetrating mechanism. The suprarenal IVC group was associated with blunt mechanism (53% vs 32%, P = .02), had lower admission systolic blood pressure, pH, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), and higher ISS and thorax and abdomen AIS than the infrarenal injury group. Injuries were managed with open repair (70%) and ligation (30% overall; infrarenal 37% vs suprarenal 13%, P = .01). Endovascular therapy was used in 2% of cases. Overall mortality was 42% (infrarenal 33% vs suprarenal 66%, P<.001). Among survivors, there was no difference in first 24-hour PRBC transfusion requirement, or hospital or ICU length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Current PROOVIT registry data demonstrate continued use of ligation extending to the suprarenal IVC, limited adoption of endovascular management, and no dramatic increase in overall survival compared to previously published studies. Survival is likely related to IVC injury location and total injury burden.

Contemporary management and time to revascularization in upper extremity arterial injury.

INTRODUCTION: Upper extremity arterial injury is associated with significant morbidity and mortality for trauma patients, but there is a paucity of data to guide the clinician in the management of these injuries. The goals of this review were to characterize the demographics, presentation, clinical management, and outcomes, and to evaluate how time to intervention associates with outcomes in trauma patients with upper extremity vascular injuries. METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) Research Data Set for the years 2007-2016 was queried in order to identify adult patients (age ≥ 18) with an upper extremity arterial injury. Patients with brachiocephalic, subclavian, axillary, or brachial artery injury using the 1998 and 2005 versions of the Abbreviated Injury Scale were included. Patients with non-survivable injuries to the brain, traumatic amputation, or other major arterial injuries to the torso or lower extremities were excluded. RESULTS: The data from 7908 patients with upper extremity arterial injuries was reviewed. Of those, 5407 (68.4%) underwent repair of the injured artery. The median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 10 (IQR = 7-18), and 7.7% of patients had a severe ISS (≥ 25). Median time to repair was 120 min (IQR = 60-240 min). Management was open repair in 52.3%, endovascular repair in 7.3%, and combined open and endovascular repairs in 8.8%; amputation occurred in 1.8% and non-operative management was used in 31.6% of patients. Blunt mechanism of injury, crush injury, concomitant fractures/dislocations, and nerve injuries were associated with amputation, whereas simultaneous venous injury was not. There was a significant decrease in the rate of amputation when patients undergoing surgical revascularization did so within 90 min of injury (P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Injuries to arteries of the upper extremity are managed with open repair, endovascular repair, and, rarely, amputation. Expeditious transport to the operating room for revascularization is the key for limb salvage.

Postoperative antiplatelet and/or anticoagulation use does not impact complication or reintervention rates after vein repair of arterial injury: A PROOVIT study.

INTRODUCTION: The use of antiplatelet (AP) and anticoagulation (AC) therapy after autogenous vein repair of traumatic arterial injury is controversial. The hypothesis in this study was that there is no difference in early postoperative outcomes regardless of whether AC, AP, both, or neither are used. METHODS: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment (PROOVIT) registry was queried from November, 2013, to January, 2019, for arterial injuries repaired with a vein graft. Demographics and injury characteristics were compared. Need for in-hospital reoperation was the primary outcome in this four-arm study, assessed with two ordinal logistic regression models (1. no therapy vs. AC only vs. AC and AP; 2. no therapy vs. AP only vs. AC and AP). RESULTS: 373 patients (52 no therapy, 88 AP only, 77 AC only, 156 both) from 19 centers with recorded Injury Severity Scores (ISS) were identified. Patients who received no therapy were younger than those who received AP (27.0 vs. 34.2, p = 0.02), had higher transfusion requirement (p < 0.01 between all groups) and a different distribution of anatomic injury (p < 0.01). After controlling for age, sex, ISS, platelet count, hemoglobin, pH, lactate, INR, transfusion requirement and anatomic location, there was no association with postoperative medical therapy and in-hospital operative reintervention, or any secondary outcome, including thrombosis (p = 0.67, p = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Neither AC nor AP alone, nor in combination, impact complication rate after arterial repair with autologous vein. These patients can be safely treated with or without antithrombotics, recognizing that this study did not demonstrate a beneficial effect.

Close surveillance imaging is unnecessary for patients with grade I blunt thoracic aortic injury.

BACKGROUND: No evidence-based recommendations exist for imaging surveillance of grade I blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAI). We aimed to evaluate the natural history of these injuries to provide guidance for follow-up imaging. METHODS: Patients that presented to our trauma center from 2008 to 2021 with grade I BTAI were retrospectively evaluated. CT angiography images were assessed for initial injury grade and subsequent stability, improvement, worsening, or resolution. RESULTS: Of 83 patients who had grade I injuries and repeat imaging, 57.8% had complete resolution, 20.5% had improvement, and 18.1% had stability of their injury. Only seven patients (8.4%) demonstrated worsening of their injury. Six patients had eventual resolution and one underwent endovascular repair that would not have been performed under current practice patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Since grade I injuries do not worsen to require later surgical intervention, early surveillance imaging is not necessary and further imaging may not be necessary at all.

The Role of Endovascular Repair of Popliteal Arterial Injuries in the Acute Setting.

BACKGROUND: The role of endovascular surgery in the treatment of popliteal arterial injuries is not well established. As with other popliteal pathology, open repair has traditionally been considered the gold standard. As data has accumulated and technology advanced, however, a reassessment of the role of endovascular surgery is warranted. The aim of this study is to perform a noninferiority comparison of open versus endovascular management of traumatic popliteal injuries. Our hypothesis is that endovascular management is noninferior to open management of traumatic popliteal injuries. METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank was searched for adult patients from 2002-2016 for isolated popliteal arterial injury. The study used a standard noninferiority methodology to compare rates of amputation and compartment syndrome between endovascular and open surgery. Margins for noninferiority were established using established published rates of complications: 17.1% for amputations and 23.0% for compartment syndrome. Endovascular intervention would be considered noninferior to open surgery if the lower bound confidence of the complication proportion (endo/open complication rate) was greater than the predefined noninferiority margin. RESULTS: A total of 3,698 patients met inclusion criteria, with blunt injury accounting for 2,117 (57%) and penetrating injury accounting for 1,581 (43%). Within the blunt group, 1,976 (93.3%) underwent open and 141 (6.7%) endovascular surgery. The rate of compartment syndrome (percentage and 95% confidence interval) after surgery for open repair was 9.9 (8.6-11.2) and 6.4 (3.2-11.3) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 64.6 (59.7-69.5). The rate of amputation for open repair was 15.7 (14.2-17.4) and 14.2 (9.2-20.6) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 90.4 (87.4-93.4). Within the penetrating group, 1,525 (96.5%) underwent open repair and 56 (3.5%) endovascular surgery. The rate of compartment syndrome after surgery for open repair was 14.9 (13.2-16.7) and 5.4 (1.5-13.6) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 36.2 (31.3-41.1). The rate of amputation for open repair was 4.3 (3.3-5.4) and 3.6 (0.7-11.0) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 83.7 (75.3-90.6). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggests that endovascular repair of popliteal artery injury may be noninferior to open repair with respect to limb preservation. Further examination of endovascular repair in popliteal artery injury is warranted.