Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Moving toward point-of-care surgery in Ukraine: testing an ultra-portable operating room in an active war zone.
Lagazzi, Emanuele; Teodorescu, Debbie Lin; Argandykov, Dias; Samotowka, Michael Alexander; King, David Richard.
Afiliación
  • Lagazzi E; Division of Trauma, Emergency Surgery and Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, 165 Cambridge Street, Suite 810, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
  • Teodorescu DL; Department of Surgery, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, MI, Italy.
  • Argandykov D; SurgiBox Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
  • Samotowka MA; Department of Cardiology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
  • King DR; Division of Trauma, Emergency Surgery and Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, 165 Cambridge Street, Suite 810, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg ; 50(3): 857-866, 2024 Jun.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38175279
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

In conflict zones, providers may have to decide between delaying time-sensitive surgeries or performing operative interventions in the field, potentially subjecting patients to significant infection risks. We conducted a single-arm crossover study to assess the feasibility of using an ultraportable operating room (U-OR) for surgical procedures on a porcine cadaver abdominal traumatic injury model in an active war zone.

METHODS:

We enrolled participants from an ASSET-type course designed to train Ukrainian surgeons before deployment to active conflict zones. They performed three standardized consecutive abdominal surgical procedures (liver, kidney, and small bowel injury repair) with and without the U-OR. Primary outcomes included surgical procedure completion rate, procedure time, and airborne particle count at the start of surgery. Secondary survey-based outcomes assessed surgery task load index (SURG-TLX) and perceived operative factors.

RESULTS:

Fourteen surgeons performed 76 surgical procedures (38 with the U-OR, 38 without the U-OR). The completion rate for each surgical procedure was 100% in both groups. While the procedure time for the liver injury repair did not differ significantly between the two groups, the use of the U-OR was associated with a longer time for kidney (155 vs. 56 s, p = 0.002), and small bowel (220 vs. 103 s, p = 0.004) injury repair. The average airborne particle count within the U-OR was substantially lower compared to outside the U-OR (6,753,852 vs. 232,282 n/m3, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in SURG-TLX for procedures performed with and without the U-OR.

CONCLUSION:

The use of the U-OR did not affect the procedure completion rate or SURG-TLX. However, there was a marked difference in airborne particle counts between inside and outside the U-OR during surgery. These preliminary findings indicate the potential feasibility of using a U-OR to perform abdominal damage-control surgical procedures in austere settings.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Quirófanos / Estudios Cruzados / Sistemas de Atención de Punto Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Animals / Humans País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Quirófanos / Estudios Cruzados / Sistemas de Atención de Punto Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Animals / Humans País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos