Early Autocalibrated Arterial Waveform Analysis for the Management of Burn Shock-A Cohort Study.

Adequate fluid therapy is crucial for resuscitation after major burns. To adapt this to individual patient demands, standard is adjustment of volume to laboratory parameters and values of enhanced hemodynamic monitoring. To implement calibrated parameters, patients must have reached the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of this study was, to evaluate the use of an auto-calibrated enhanced hemodynamic monitoring device to improve fluid management before admission to ICU. We used PulsioflexProAqt® (Getinge) during initial treatment and burn shock resuscitation. Analysis was performed regarding time of measurement, volume management, organ dysfunction, and mortality. We conducted a monocentre, prospective cohort study of 20 severely burned patients, >20% total body surface area (TBSA), receiving monitoring immediately after admission. We compared to 57 patients, matched in terms of TBSA, age, sex, and existence of inhalation injury out of a retrospective control group, who received standard care. Hemodynamic measurement with autocalibrated monitoring started significantly earlier: 3.75(2.67-6.0) hours (h) after trauma in the study group versus 13.6(8.1-17.5) h in the control group (P < .001). Study group received less fluid after 6 h: 1.7(1.2-2.2) versus 2.3(1.6-2.8) ml/TBSA%/kg, P = .043 and 12 h: 3.0(2.5-4.0) versus 4.2(3.1-5.0) ml/TBSA%/kg, P = .047. Dosage of norepinephrine was higher after 18 h in the study group: 0.20(0.12-0.3) versus 0.08(0.02-0.18) µg/kg/min, P = .014. The study group showed no adult respiratory distress syndrome versus 21% in the control group, P = .031. There was no difference in other organ failures, organ replacement therapy, and mortality. The use of auto-calibrated enhanced hemodynamic monitoring is a fast and feasible way to guide early fluid therapy after burn trauma. It reduces the time to reach information about patient's volume capacity. Management of fluid application changed to a more restrictive fluid use in the early period of burn shock and led to a reduction of pulmonary complications.

Prehospital treatment of severely burned patients: a retrospective analysis of patients admitted to the Berlin burn centre.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital management of severely burned patients is extremely challenging. It should include adequate analgesia, decision-making on the necessity of prehospital endotracheal intubation and the administration of crystalloid fluids. Guidelines recommend immediate transport to specialised burn centres when certain criteria are met. To date, there is still insufficient knowledge on the characteristics of prehospital emergency treatment. We sought to investigate the current practice and its potential effects on patient outcome. METHODS: We conducted a single centre, retrospective cohort analysis of severely burned patients (total burned surface area > 20%), admitted to the Berlin burn centre between 2014 and 2019. The relevant data was extracted from Emergency Medical Service reports and digital patient charts for exploratory data analysis. Primary outcome was 28-day-mortality. RESULTS: Ninety patients (male/female 60/30, with a median age of 52 years [interquartile range, IQR 37-63], median total burned surface area 36% [IQR 25-51] and median body mass index 26.56 kg/m2 [IQR 22.86-30.86] were included. The median time from trauma to ED arrival was 1 h 45 min; within this time, on average 1961 ml of crystalloid fluid (0.48 ml/kg/%TBSA, IQR 0.32-0.86) was administered. Most patients received opioid-based analgesia. Times from trauma to ED arrival were longer for patients who were intubated. Neither excessive fluid treatment (> 1000 ml/h) nor transport times > 2 h was associated with higher mortality. A total of 31 patients (34,4%) died within the hospital stay. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that non-survival was linked to age > 65 years (odds ratio (OR) 3.5, 95% CI: 1.27-9.66), inhalation injury (OR 3.57, 95% CI: 1.36-9.36), burned surface area > 60% (OR 5.14, 95% CI 1.57-16.84) and prehospital intubation (5.38, 95% CI: 1.92-15.92). CONCLUSION: We showed that severely burned patients frequently received excessive fluid administration prehospitally and that this was not associated with more hemodynamic stability or outcome. In our cohort, patients were frequently intubated prehospitally, which was associated with increased mortality rates. Further research and emergency medical staff training should focus on adequate fluid application and cautious decision-making on the risks and benefits of prehospital intubation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trial Registry (ID: DRKS00033516).