Traumatismo torácico con lesión de grandes vasos del tórax: características, tratamiento y variables asociadas a mortalidad / Thoracic trauma with injury to the great vessels of the chest: characteristics, treatments and variables associated with mortality

Resumen Introducción: Las lesiones de grandes vasos del tórax por traumatismo torácico (TTLGV) son un grupo heterogéneo de lesiones con alta morbimortalidad que constituyen un 0,3-10% de los hallazgos en el traumatismo torácico (TT). Objetivos: Describir características, tratamientos y variables asociadas a mortalidad en pacientes hospitalizados con TTLGV. Material y Métodos: Estudio analítico-observacional. Período enero-1981 y diciembre-2020. Revisión de protocolos de TT prospectivos y fichas clínicas. Se clasificaron los TTLGV según American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), se calcularon índices de gravedad del traumatismo: Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score Triage (RTS-T) y Trauma Injury Severity Score (TRISS). Se realizó análisis univariado y multivariado con cálculo de Odds Ratio (OR) para variables asociadas a mortalidad. Se usó SPSS25®, con pruebas UMann Whitney y chi-cuadrado, según corresponda. Resultados: de un total 4.577 TT, 97 (2,1%) cumplieron criterios de inclusión. Hombres: 81 (91,8%), edad promedio: 32,3 ± 14,8 años. TT penetrante: 65 (67,0%). Lesión de arterias axilo-subclavias en 39 (40,2%) y aorta torácica en 31 (32,0%) fueron las más frecuentes. Fueron AAST 5-6: 39 (40,2%). Tratamiento invasivo: 87 (89,7%), de éstos, en 20 (20,6%) reparación endovascular, 14 (14,4%) de aorta torácica. Cirugía abierta en 67 (69,1%). Mortalidad en 13 (13,4%), fueron variables independientes asociadas a mortalidad el shock al ingreso (OR 6,34) e ISS > 25 (OR 6,03). Conclusión: En nuestra serie, los TTLGV fueron más frecuentemente de vasos axilo-subclavios y aorta torácica. El tratamiento fue principalmente invasivo, siendo la cirugía abierta el más frecuente. Se identificaron variables asociadas a mortalidad.

Background: Thoracic great vessel injuries in thoracic trauma (TTGVI) are a heterogeneous group of injuries with high morbimortality that constituting 0.3-10% of the findings in thoracic trauma (TT). Aim: To describe characteristics, treatments and variables associated with mortality in hospitalized patients with TTGVI. Methods: Observational-analytical study. Period January-1981 and December-2020. Review of prospective TT protocols and clinical records. TTGVI were classified according to American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), trauma severity index were calculated: Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score Triage (RTS-T) and Trauma Injury Severity Score (TRISS). Univariate and multi- variate analysis was performed with calculation of Odds Ratio (OR) for variables associated with mortality. SPSS25® was used, with U Mann Whitney and chi-squared tests, as appropriate. Results: From a total of 4.577 TT in the period, 97 (2.1%) met the inclusion criteria. Males: 81 (91.8%), mean age: 32.3 ± 14.8 years. Penetrating TT: 65 (67.0%). Axillary-subclavian artery lesions in 39 (40.2%) and thoracic aorta in 31 (32.0%) were more frequent. AAST 5-6: 39 (40.2%). Invasive treatment: 87 (89.7%), of these, in 20 (20.6%) endovascular repair, 14 (14.4%) of thoracic aorta. Open surgery in 67 (69.1%). Mortality in 13 (13.4%), shock on admission was independently associated with mortality (OR 6.34) and ISS > 25 (OR 6.03). Conclusión: In our series, TTGVI were more frequent in axillary-subclavian vessels and thoracic aorta. Treatment was mainly invasive, with open surgery being the most frequent. Variables associated with mortality were identified.

Review article: History of venous trauma.

ABSTRACT: This is a literature review on the history of venous trauma since the 1800s, especially that to the common femoral, femoral and popliteal veins, with focus on the early 1900s, World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, and then civilian and military reviews (1960-2020). In the latter two groups, tables were used to summarize the following: incidence of venous repair versus ligation, management of popliteal venous injuries, patency of venous repairs when assessed <30 days from operation, patency of venous repairs when assessed >30 days from operation, clinical assessment (edema or not) after ligation versus repair, incidence of deep venous thrombosis after ligation versus repair, and incidence of pulmonary embolism after ligation versus repair.There is a lack of the following in the literature on the management of venous injuries over the past 80 years: standard definition of magnitude of venous injury in operative reports, accepted indications for venous repair, standard postoperative management, and timing and mode of early and later postoperative assessment.Multiple factors have entered into the decision on venous ligation versus repair after trauma for the past 60 years, but a surgeon's training and local management protocols have the most influence in both civilian and military centers. Ligation of venous injuries, particularly those in the lower extremities, is well tolerated in civilian trauma, although there is the usual lack of short- and long-term follow-up as noted in many of the articles reviewed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review article, levels IV and V.

Increased vertebral exposure in anterior lumbar interbody fusion associated with venous injury and deep venous thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Published outcomes on anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) have focused on 1-2 level fusion with and without vascular surgery assistance. We examined the influence of multilevel fusion on exposure-related outcomes when performed by vascular surgeons. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed clinical and radiographic data for patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with exposure performed by vascular surgeons at a single practice. RESULTS: From 2017-2018, 201 consecutive patients underwent vascular-assisted ALIF. Patients were divided by number of vertebral levels exposed (90 patients with 1 level exposed, 71 with 2, 40 with 3+). Demographically, 3+ level fusion patients were older (P=.0045) and more likely to have had prior ALIF (P=.0383). Increased vertebral exposure was associated with higher rates of venous injury (P=.0251), increased procedural time (P= .0116), length of stay (P=.0001), and incidence of postoperative DVT (P=.0032). There was a 6.5% rate of intraoperative vascular injury, comprised of 3 major and 10 minor venous injuries. In patients who experienced complications, 92.3% of injuries were repaired primarily. 23% of patients with venous injuries developed postoperative deep venous thrombosis. In a multivariate logistic regression model, increased levels of exposure (RR = 6.23, P = .026) and a history of degenerative spinal disease (RR = .033, P = .033) were predictive of intraoperative venous injury. CONCLUSIONS: Increased vertebral exposure in anterior lumbar interbody fusion is associated with increased risk of intraoperative venous injury and postoperative deep venous thrombosis, with subsequently greater lengths of procedure time and length of stay. Rates of arterial and sympathetic injury were not affected by exposure extent.

Technical approach, outcomes, and exposure-related complications in patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

OBJECTIVE: To describe our technique, evaluate access related complications and factors contributing to adverse outcomes in patients undergoing retroperitoneal anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on patients undergoing ALIF at our institution from January 2008 to December 2017. Access was performed by a vascular surgeon who remained present for the duration of the case. Data collected included patients' demographics, comorbidities, exposure related complications and ileus. Study end points included major adverse events and minor complications. Major adverse events included any vascular injuries requiring repair, bowel and ureter injuries, postoperative bleeding requiring reoperation, myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism/deep venous thrombosis), wound dehiscence, and death. Minor complications included postoperative paralytic ileus, urinary tract infections, and surgical site infections. The incidence of incisional hernia was also evaluated. RESULTS: During this period, 1178 patients (514 males and 664 females; mean age, 54.1 ± 13.8 years) underwent a total of 2352 levels ALIF at our institution (single level, 422 patients; 2 levels, 450; 3 levels, 205; 4 levels, 98; 5 levels, 6; 6 levels, 1; and 7 levels, 1). The median estimated blood loss was 25 mL (interquartile range, 25-50). There were 57 exposure-related complications (4.8%), including vascular injuries (venous, 13; arterial, 4) in 17 patients (1.4%), bowel injuries in three patients (serosa tear in two and arterial embolization with subsequent bowel ischemia in one). Eleven of the 13 venous injuries (84.6%) occurred while exposing the L4 to L5 lumbar level. Two of the four patients with arterial injuries developed acute limb ischemia requiring embolectomy. One embolized to the superior mesenteric artery and underwent bowel resection. Twenty patients (1.7%) developed venous thromboembolism, two of whom had sustained left iliac vein injury during exposure. Sixteen patients (1.4%) developed a retroperitoneal hematoma/seroma with nine requiring evacuation in the operating room. Thirty-six patients (3.1%) developed postoperative ileus, defined as an inability to tolerate diet on postoperative day 3. Four patients (0.4%) had a postoperative myocardial infarction, and two had a stroke and two (0.17%) died within the first 30 postoperative days. Thirty-one patients developed incisional complications, including surgical site infection in 24 and incisional hernia in 7. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that ALIF exposure can be performed safely with a relatively low overall complication rate. The majority of vascular injuries associated with this procedure are venous in nature, occurring predominantly while exposing the L4 to L5 level and can be safely addressed by an experienced vascular team.

An Update on Foley Catheter Balloon Tamponade for Penetrating Neck Injuries.

BACKGROUND: Foley catheter balloon tamponade (FCBT) for bleeding penetrating neck injuries (PNIs) is effective. This study aims to audit the technique and outcomes of FCBT. METHODS: Adult patients with PNIs requiring FCBT presenting to Groote Schuur Hospital (GSH) within a 22-month study period were prospectively captured on an approved electronic registry. Retrospective analysis included demographics, major injuries, investigations, management and outcomes. RESULTS: During the study period, 628 patients with PNI were treated at GSH. In 95 patients (15.2%), FCBT was utilised. The majority were men (98%) with an average age of 27.9 years. Most injuries were caused by stab wounds (90.5%). The majority of catheters (81.1%) were inserted prior to arrival at GSH. Computerised tomographic angiography (CTA) was done in 92.6% of patients, while eight patients (8.4%) required catheter-directed angiography. Six were performed for interventional endovascular management. Thirty-four arterial injuries were identified in 29 patients. Ongoing bleeding was noted in three patients, equating to a 97% success rate for haemorrhage control. Thirteen (13.7%) patients required neck exploration. Seventy-two (75.8%) patients without major arterial injury had removal of the catheter at 48-72 h. Two of these bled on catheter removal. A total of 36 complications were documented in 28 patients (29.5%). There was one death due to uncontrolled haemorrhage from the neck wound. CONCLUSION: This large series highlights the ease of use of FCBT with high rates of success at haemorrhage control (97%). Venous injuries and minor arterial injuries are definitively managed with this technique.

Lower extremity vascular injuries caused by firearms have a higher risk of amputation and death compared with non-firearm penetrating trauma.

OBJECTIVE: Firearm injuries have traditionally been associated with worse outcomes compared with other types of penetrating trauma. Lower extremity trauma with vascular injury is a common presentation at many centers. Our goal was to compare firearm and non-firearm lower extremity penetrating injuries requiring vascular repair. METHODS: We analyzed the National Inpatient Sample from 2010 to 2014 for all penetrating lower extremity injuries requiring vascular repair based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes. Our primary outcomes were in-hospital lower extremity amputation and death. RESULTS: We identified 19,494 patients with lower extremity penetrating injuries requiring vascular repair-15,727 (80.7%) firearm injuries and 3767 (19.3%) non-firearm injuries. The majority of patients were male (91%), and intent was most often assault/legal intervention (64.3%). In all penetrating injuries requiring vascular repair, the majority (72.9%) had an arterial injury and 43.8% had a venous injury. Location of vascular injury included iliac (19.3%), femoral-popliteal (60%), and tibial (13.2%) vascular segments. Interventions included direct vascular repair (52.1%), ligation (22.1%), bypass (19.4%), and endovascular procedures (3.6%). Patients with firearm injuries were more frequently younger, black, male, and on Medicaid, with lower household income, intent of assault or legal action, and two most severe injuries in the same body region (P < .0001 for all). Firearm injuries compared with non-firearm injuries were more often reported to be arterial (75.5% vs 61.9%), to involve iliac (20.6% vs 13.7%) and femoral-popliteal vessels (64.7% vs 39.9%), to undergo endovascular repair (4% vs 2.1%), and to have a bypass (22.5% vs 6.5%; P < .05 for all). Firearm-related in-hospital major amputation (3.3% vs 0.8%; P = .001) and mortality (7.6% vs 4.2%; P = .001) were higher compared with non-firearm penetrating trauma. Multivariable analysis showed that injury by a firearm source was independently associated with postoperative major amputation (odds ratio, 4.78; 95% confidence interval, 2.07-11.01; P < .0001) and mortality (odds ratio, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-2.65; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Firearm injury is associated with a higher rate of amputation and mortality compared with non-firearm injuries of the lower extremity requiring vascular repair. These data can continue to guide public health discussions about morbidity and mortality from firearm injury.

Deep vein sclerosis following sclerotherapy: Ultrasonic and d-dimer criteria.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of sclerotherapy is to induce fibrosclerosis of superficial veins. We postulated that inadvertent entry of sclerosants into deep veins can result in sclerotic occlusion, deep vein sclerosis, a non-thrombotic process distinct from spontaneous deep vein thrombosis. The aim of this study was to assess the role of d-dimer in differentiating between deep vein sclerosis and deep vein thrombosis. METHODS: Proximal trunks of great and small saphenous veins were treated with endovenous laser ablation. Venous tributaries and perforators were treated with foam ultrasound guided sclerotherapy. Ultrasound studies of lower limb deep veins were performed before and one week after the procedures, to detect deep vein occlusions (DVOs). d-dimer levels were measured for DVOs and long-term ultrasound studies monitored the recanalisation rates. RESULTS: In a six-year period, 9143 procedures were performed in 1325 patients for bilateral varicose veins. This included 1124 endovenous laser ablation and 8019 foam ultrasound guided sclerotherapy procedures. A total of 259 DVOs (2.83%) were identified on ultrasound which included 251 deep vein sclerosis (2.74%), seven deep vein thrombosis (0.07%) and one endovenous heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT, 0.08%). d-dimer values <0.5 µg/mL excluded deep vein thrombosis s, 0.5-1.0 µg/mL were more likely to be associated with deep vein sclerosis and >1.0 µg/mL were a more likely to be associated with deep vein thrombosis. Lower sclerosant concentrations and higher foam volumes were associated with increased risk of DVO (p < .0001). No significant relationship was found between DVO and gender or thrombophilia. Deep vein thrombosis and EHIT cases but not deep vein sclerosis patients were anticoagulated. None had thromboembolic complications. Patients were followed up for a median of 299 days (37-1994 days). Recanalisation rates were 71.1% for deep vein sclerosis (92.3% competent) and 71.4% for deep vein thrombosis (60.0% competent). CONCLUSIONS: Deep vein sclerosis is a relatively benign clinical entity distinct from deep vein thrombosis and does not require anticoagulation. Majority of affected veins on long-term follow-up regain patency and competence. d-dimer can be used to assist in differentiating deep vein sclerosis from deep vein thrombosis.

Major venous injury and large volume crystalloid resuscitation: A limb threatening combination.

INTRODUCTION: Major venous injury (MVI) affecting the lower extremity can result in subsequent amputation. The contribution of intraoperative resuscitation efforts on the need for amputation is not well defined. We hypothesized that intraoperative large volume crystalloid resuscitation (LVCR) increases the risk of amputation after MVI, while massive transfusion (MT) does not. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with infrarenal MVI from 2005 to 2015 at seven urban level I trauma centers. The outcome of interest was the need for secondary amputation. RESULTS: 478 patients were included. 31 (6.5%) patients with MVI required amputation. LVCR(p < 0.001), combined arterial/venous injury (p = 0.001), and associated fracture (p = 0.001) were significant risk factors for amputation. MT did not significantly increase amputation risk (p = 0.44). Multivariable logistic regression model demonstrated that patients receiving ≥5L LVCR(aOR (95% CI): 9.7 (2.9, 33.0); p < 0.001), with combined arterial/venous injury (aOR (95% CI):3.6 (1.5, 8.5); p = 0.004), and with an associated fracture (aOR (95% CI):3.2 (1.5, 7.1); p = 0.004) were more likely to require amputation. CONCLUSION: Patients with MVI who receive LVCR, have combined arterial/venous injuries and have associated fractures are more likely to require amputation. MT was not associated with delayed amputation.

Injecting-related health harms and overuse of acidifiers among people who inject heroin and crack cocaine in London: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Venous access is a priority for people who inject drugs (PWID). Damage and scarring of peripheral veins can exacerbate health harms, such as skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI), and promote transitions to femoral and subcutaneous injecting. Brown heroin available in Europe requires acidification for injection preparation. In this paper, we present mixed-methods data to explore our hypothesis of a link between overly acidic injection solutions, venous damage and SSTI risk. METHODS: We present a structured survey (n = 455) and in-depth qualitative interview (n = 31) data generated with PWID in London for the Care & Prevent study. Participants provided life history data and detail on injecting environments and drug preparation practices, including the use of acidifiers. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using a logistic regression for binary outcomes to explore associations between outcomes and excessive acidifier use. Grounded theory principles informed inductive qualitative analysis. Mixed-methods triangulation was iterative with results comparison informing the direction and questions asked of further analyses. RESULTS: Of the 455 participants, most (92%) injected heroin and/or crack cocaine, with 84% using citric as their primary acid for drug preparation. Overuse of acidifier was common: of the 418 who provided an estimate, 36% (n = 150) used more than ½ a sachet, with 30% (n = 127) using a whole sachet or more. We found associations between acidifier overuse, femoral injecting and DVT, but not SSTI. Qualitative accounts highlight the role of poor heroin quality, crack cocaine use, information and manufacturing constraints in acidifier overuse. Painful injections and damage to peripheral veins were common and often attributed to the use of citric acid. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce injecting-related injury and associated consequences, it is crucial to understand the interplay of environmental and practice-based risks underpinning venous damage among PWID. Overuse of acidifier is a modifiable risk factor. In the absence of structural supports such as safe injecting facilities or the prescribing of pharmaceutical diamorphine, there is an urgent need to revisit injecting paraphernalia design and distribution in order to alleviate health harms and distress among the most marginalised.

Effect of temporary vascular shunting as a previous intervention on lower extremity arterial injury: Single center experiences in the Syrian Civil War.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this retrospective study was to clarify the effect of using temporary vascular shunt (TVS) as a previous intervention. METHODS: A total of 96 cases with war-related lower extremity arterial injury and surgically treated between October 2013 and March 2016 were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups: those in which TVS was performed as a previous intervention on admission (TVS group, n=24) and those in which compression, tourniquet, and ligation/clampage were performed as a previous intervention on admission (non-TVS group, n=72). RESULTS: In comparing injury pattern, there was no difference between the two groups. In addition, mean hematocrit level, mean systolic blood pressure, the incidence of concomitant vein injury, nerve injury, soft tissue damage, and bone injury were similar in both groups. The overall amputation rate was 19%. There were a total of 18 amputations, with 1 (4%) in the TVS group and 17 (24%) in the non-TVS group. The difference on amputation rate was statistically significant. The mean values of the mangled extremity severity score (MESS) were 6.45 in the TVS group and 7.44 in the non-TVS group. The overall mean MESS was 7.1. The duration of ischemia (DoI) was 4.84+-1.84 h in the TVS group and 5.95+-1.92 h in the non-TVS group. These differences in MESS and DoI were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: We think that it may be beneficial for patients to consider a TVS to reduce DoI and gain time for surgical revascularization. As a result, the present study demonstrates that the use of TVS may successfully serve as a bridge between initial injury and definitive repair with a reduction in amputation rates.

Effect of a notch at the distal end of a microcatheter on vein deformation in segmental adrenal venous sampling: a preliminary study using computational fluid dynamics.

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a notch at the distal end of a microcatheter on vein deformation in segmental adrenal venous sampling. A three-dimensional fluid-structure interaction simulation was performed using commercial finite element software. A computational model of a vein with a catheter inserted into it was constructed. The outer and inner diameters of the vein were 0.9 mm and 0.6 mm, respectively, whereas those of the catheter were 0.6 mm and 0.5 mm, respectively. The velocity of the blood flow at the outlet was 85 mm/s. The pressure at the inlet was 0 Pa. The mesh consisted of approximately 660,000 elements. The effect of the number (0-4) and shape (no notch, 1/4 circular, 1/3 circular, semicircular, 2/3 circlecircular, and 3/4 circular) of the notches at the distal end of the microcatheter on the vein deformation when a suction pressure was applied was evaluated. The venous wall displacement was the smallest with the one-notch catheter, followed by the four-notch catheter, and was the smallest with the catheter having 1/4-circular notches, followed by the one with 1/3-circular notches. In conclusion, microcatheters having one notch and 1/4-circular notches reduce vein deformation and lead to successful segmental adrenal venous sampling. Graphical abstract Comparing catheters having different notch shapes.

Outcomes Comparison Between Ligation and Repair after Major Lower Extremity Venous Injury.

BACKGROUND: The necessity of repair remains controversial after major lower extremity venous injuries (MLEVIs). Ligation may cause venous hypertension which should be managed with fasciotomies. Previous studies have shown that fasciotomy rate is not affected by the type of management of MLEVIs. The aim of this study was to examine the rate of fasciotomy, amputation, and other complications from a difference between ligation and repair of MLEVIs. METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) for 2010-2014 was reviewed. Eligible patients were restricted to MLEVI patients who underwent surgical ligation or repair. Data on demographics, rate of fasciotomy, secondary amputation, and other complications were collected. Comparative analysis between ligation and repair on demographics, complications, and outcomes was performed using multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 2120 patients were identified in NTDB and 1029 (48.5%) underwent ligation while 1091 (51.5%) underwent repair. The overall rate of fasciotomy and secondary amputation was 38.9% (n = 824) and 4.8% (n = 101), respectively. Patients in the ligation group had a higher proportion of university hospital setting and penetrating injury. Otherwise, there was no significant difference in other characteristics between the 2 groups. Patients in the ligation group had significantly higher rates of fasciotomy and secondary amputation and longer hospital length of stay (LOS) than those in the repair group (44.6% vs. 33.5%, risk ratio [RR] 1.33, 6.1% vs. 3.4%, RR 1.81, 11 [6-20] vs. 9 [5-17], respectively). Otherwise, there was no significant difference in all other complications and in-hospital mortality between 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The fasciotomy rate was surprisingly high and affected by venous ligation in patients with MLEVIs. Considering the overall physiological condition, trauma surgeons should perform venous repair aggressively and prepare judiciously for fasciotomy after surgery. Avoiding venous ligation and maintaining venous outflow may contribute to not only reducing the need for fasciotomy and LOS but also saving limbs.

Factors Contributing to Morbidity after Combined Arterial and Venous Lower Extremity Trauma.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of management of venous injury on clinical outcomes in patients with combined lower extremity arterial and venous trauma. Patients with common and external iliac, common and superficial femoral, and popliteal artery injuries were identified. Patients who underwent vein repair and those who received vein ligation were compared. The analysis was repeated for those patients who required secondary intervention for their arterial injury and those who did not require secondary intervention. Seventy patients were identified with both arterial and venous injuries: 40 underwent vein ligation and 30 received vein repair. There was no difference in ischemic time between patients undergoing vein repair compared with ligation. Vein ligation did not produce a higher incidence of muscle debridement (10% vs 15%, P = 0.72), necessity for secondary intervention (10% vs 7.5%, P = 0.99), or amputation (3.3% vs 7.5%, P = 0.63). Patients who required secondary intervention had a greater degree of shock on presentation (packed red blood cells (PRBC), 13 units vs 6 units, P = 0.02) and were more likely to require muscle debridement (50% vs 9%, P = 0.02) and amputation (33% vs 3%, P = 0.03). Vein ligation did not impact muscle ischemia or success of arterial repair in patients with combined venous and arterial trauma in the lower extremities. Patient morbidity after extremity vascular trauma is most related to degree of shock.

Iatrogenic Major Venous Injury Is Associated with Increased Morbidity of Aortic Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Major venous injury during open aortic reconstruction though uncommon often result in sudden and massive blood loss resulting in increased morbidity and mortality. This study details the etiology, management, and outcome of such injuries. METHODS: A retrospective review of 945 patients (1981-2017) undergoing aortic reconstruction from 2 midsized (350 bed each) teaching hospitals was conducted. Seven hundred twenty-three patients (76.5%) underwent open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair/iliac aneurysm repair, 222 patients (23.5%) underwent aortofemoral grafting (AFG). Patients sustaining major venous injury (sudden loss of more than 500 mL of blood) during major aortic reconstruction were studied. The number of units of packed red blood cells transfused, location of injured vessel, type of repair, postoperative morbidity, and mortality were collected in our vascular registry on a continuous basis. All patients identified with iliac vein/inferior vena cava/femoral vein injury had follow-up noninvasive venous examination of the lower extremities. RESULTS: Eighteen major venous injuries (1.9%) occurred during aortic reconstruction in 17 patients (1 patient had 2 major venous injuries): IVC (n = 4), iliac vein (n = 10), left renal vein (n = 4, this includes a posterior retroaortic renal vein injury n = 1). Of the 18 major venous injuries, 7 occurred during open AAA repair for ruptured AAA and another 9 occurred during repair of intact AAA (P = 0.001), 2 venous injuries occurred after AFG, and 1 after primary AFG (P = 0.05). Using multivariate regression analysis, periarterial inflammation had significant association with major venous injury (P < 0.001). The presence of associated iliac aneurysm with abdominal aortic aneurysm also increased the incidence of major venous injury during AAA surgery (P = 0.05). Two patients (11.8%) died, one from uncontrolled bleeding due to tear of right common iliac vein during ruptured AAA repair and second patient from disseminated intravascular complication following repair of ruptured AAA. Intraoperative transfusion requirements were 3-28 units, (median 8 units). Three of 9 (33%) surviving patients developed iliofemoral venous thrombosis following repair of iliac/femoral vein injury. CONCLUSIONS: Major venous injury during aortic reconstructions occurs more commonly during the repair of ruptured AAA and redo AFG. Following repair of iliac/femoral vein injury, surveillance for possible deep venous thrombosis by duplex imaging should be considered.