Treatment Strategies And Outcomes Of Thoracic Aortic Blunt Injuries In Adults: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAI) once had mortality rates up to 32%, but the advent of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has significantly improved outcomes. However, concerns persist regarding long-term devicerelated complications, device integrity in aging aortas, and the criteria for selecting patients for endovascular repair. We aimed to assess BTAI treatment strategies based on injury grade and their associated outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search of MedLine and Scopus databases was conducted to identify original articles published after 2013, which provided information on injury characteristics, outcomes, secondary effects, and reinterventions following BTAI. We classified aortic injuries following the SVS Clinical Practice Guidelines. RESULTS: We included 28 studies involving 1888 BTAI patients, including 5 prospective studies. Most patients were under 45 years old (86.4%), and grade III injuries were the most common (901 patients), followed by grades I and II (307 and 291 patients, respectively). TEVAR was performed in 1458 patients, mainly with grade III and IV injuries (1040 patients). Approximately half of the grade I injuries (153 of 307) were treated with TEVAR. Thirty-day mortality rate was 11.2%, primarily due to associated injuries. Aortic-related deaths were reported in 21 studies, with an overall rate of 2.2%, but none occurred beyond the first 30 days. Partial or complete coverage of the left subclavian artery was performed in 522 patients, with 27.9% requiring immediate or delayed revascularization. Aortic reintervention rates were relatively low (3.9%). CONCLUSION: TEVAR effectively treats BTAI grades III and IV, with potential benefit for some grade II injuries with more aggressive early intervention. Despite SVS guidelines suggesting conservative management for grade I injuries, there is a substantial rate of intervention with positive outcomes and low mortality. Long-term follow-up data, extending up to almost 20 years, reveal the durability of grafts, aortic remodeling, and minimal reintervention and complications.

Incidence, mortality, and predictive factors associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome in multiple trauma patients living in high-altitude areas: a retrospective study in Shigatse.

Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a severe complication that can lead to fatalities in multiple trauma patients. Nevertheless, the incidence rate and early prediction of ARDS among multiple trauma patients residing in high-altitude areas remain unknown. Methods: This study included a total of 168 multiple trauma patients who received treatment at Shigatse People's Hospital Intensive Care Unit (ICU) between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2021. The clinical characteristics of the patients and the incidence rate of ARDS were assessed. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were employed to identify potential risk factors for ARDS, and the predictive effects of these risk factors were analyzed. Results: In the high-altitude area, the incidence of ARDS among multiple trauma patients was 37.5% (63/168), with a hospital mortality rate of 16.1% (27/168). Injury Severity Score (ISS) and thoracic injuries were identified as significant predictors for ARDS using the logistic regression model, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.75 and 0.75, respectively. Furthermore, a novel predictive risk score combining ISS and thoracic injuries demonstrated improved predictive ability, achieving an AUC of 0.82. Conclusions: This study presents the incidence of ARDS in multiple trauma patients residing in the Tibetan region, and identifies two critical predictive factors along with a risk score for early prediction of ARDS. These findings have the potential to enhance clinicians' ability to accurately assess the risk of ARDS and proactively prevent its onset.

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures in the geriatric trauma population is associated with equivalent outcomes to a younger cohort: A propensity matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) improves outcomes in chest wall trauma. Geriatric patients are particularly vulnerable to poor outcomes; yet, this population is often excluded from SSRF studies. Further delineating patient outcomes by age is necessary to optimize care for the aging trauma population. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted examining outcomes among patients aged 40+ for whom an SSRF consult was placed between 2017 and 2022 at a level 1 trauma center. Patients were categorized into geriatric (65+) and adult (40-64), as well as 80 years and older (80+) and 79 and younger (40-79). Patient outcomes were assessed comparing non-operative and operative management of chest wall trauma. Propensity matched analysis was performed to evaluate mortality differences between adult and geriatric patients who did and did not undergo SSRF. RESULTS: A total of 543 patients had an SSRF consult. Of these, 227 were 65+, and 73 were 80+. A total of 129 patients underwent SSRF (24 %). The percentage of patients undergoing SSRF did not vary between 40 and 64 and 65+ (23.7 % and 23.6 %, respectively, p = 0.97) or 40-79 and 80+ (24.0 vs 21.9, p = 0.69). Patients undergoing SSRF had higher chest injury burden and were more likely to require mechanical ventilation and ICU level care on admission. Overall, in-hospital mortality rate was 4.6 %. Among patients who underwent SSRF, mortality rate did not significantly differ between 65+ and 40-64 (7.8% vs 2.7 %, p = 0.18) or 80+ and 40-79 (6.3% vs 4.6 %, p = 0.77). This remained true in propensity matched analysis. CONCLUSION: Geriatric and octogenarian patients with rib fractures underwent SSRF at similar rates and achieved equivalent outcomes to their younger counterparts. SSRF did not differentially affect mortality outcomes based on age group in propensity matched analysis. SSRF is safe for geriatric patients including octogenarians.

Comparison between Injury Severity Score (ISS) and New Injury Severity Score (NISS) in predicting mortality of thoracic trauma in a tertiary hospital.

INTRODUCTION: measuring the severity of traumatic injuries is crucial for predicting clinical outcomes. Whereas the Injury Severity Score (ISS) has limitations in assigning scores to injuries at the same site, the New Injury Severity Score (NISS) corrects for this problem by taking into account the three most severe injuries regardless of the region of the body. This study seeks to comprehend the clinical and epidemiological profile of trauma patients while comparing the effectiveness of scales for predicting mortality. METHODS: a descriptive, observational and retrospective study using records of patients who underwent thoracotomy at the Hospital das Clínicas of the Federal University of Triângulo Mineiro between 2000 and 2019. Demographic data, mechanisms of injury, affected organs, length of stay and mortality were analyzed. Injury severity was assessed using the ISS and NISS, and statistical analyses were conducted using MedCalc and SigmaPlot. RESULTS: 101 patients were assessed, on average 29.6 years old, 86.13% of whom were men. The average duration of hospitalization was 10.9 days and the mortality rate was 28.7%. The ROC curve analysis revealed a sensitivity of 68.97%, specificity of 80.56% and area under the curve of 0.837 for the ISS, and 58.62%, 94.44% and 0.855 for the NISS, respectively. The Youden index was 0.49 for the ISS and 0.53 for the NISS. CONCLUSION: the study demonstrated comparable efficacy of NISS and ISS in predicting mortality. These findings hold significance in the hospital setting. Professionals must be familiar with these scales to utilize them competently for each patient.

Impact of comorbidities in severely injured patients with blunt chest injury: A population-based retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Blunt chest injuries result in up to 10 % of major trauma admissions. Comorbidities can complicate recovery and increase the mortality rate in this patient cohort. A better understanding of the association between comorbidities and patient outcomes will facilitate enhanced models of care for particularly vulnerable groups of patients, such as older adults. AIMS: i) compare the characteristics of severely injured patients with blunt chest injury with and without comorbidities and ii) examine the relationship between comorbidities and key patient outcomes: prolonged length of stay, re-admission within 28 days, and mortality within 30 days in a cohort of patients with blunt chest injury admitted after severe trauma. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using linked data from the NSW Trauma Registry and NSW mortality and hospitalisation records between 1st of January 2012 and 31st of December 2019. RESULTS: After adjusting for potential confounding factors, patients with severe injuries, chest injuries, and comorbidities were found to have a 34 % increased likelihood of having a prolonged length of stay (OR = 1.34, 95 %I = 1.17-1.53) compared to patients with no comorbidities. There was no difference in 30-day mortality for patients with a severe chest injury who did or did not have comorbidities (OR = 1.05, 95 %CI = 0.80-1.39). No significant association was found between comorbidities and re-admission within 28 days. CONCLUSION: Severely injured patients with blunt chest injury and comorbidities are at risk of prolonged length of stay.

Surgeon volume and outcomes following thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury.

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) at high-volume hospitals has previously been associated with lower perioperative mortality, but the impact of annual surgeon volume on outcomes following TEVAR for BTAI remains unknown. METHODS: We analyzed Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) data from patients with BTAI that underwent TEVAR between 2013 and 2023. Annual surgeon volumes were computed as the number of TEVARs (for any pathology) performed over a 1-year period preceding each procedure and were further categorized into quintiles. Surgeons in the first volume quintile were categorized as low volume (LV), the highest quintile as high volume (HV), and the middle three quintiles as medium volume (MV). TEVAR procedures performed by surgeons with less than 1-year enrollment in the VQI were excluded. Using multilevel logistic regression models, we evaluated associations between surgeon volume and perioperative outcomes, accounting for annual center volumes and adjusting for potential confounders, including aortic injury grade and severity of coexisting injuries. Multilevel models accounted for the nested clustering of patients and surgeons within the same center. Sensitivity analysis excluding patients with grade IV BTAI was performed. RESULTS: We studied 1321 patients who underwent TEVAR for BTAI (28% by LV surgeons [0-1 procedures per year], 52% by MV surgeons [2-8 procedures per year], 20% by HV surgeons [≥9 procedures per year]). With higher surgeon volume, TEVAR was delayed more (in <4 hours: LV: 68%, MV: 54%, HV: 46%; P < .001; elective (>24 hours): LV: 5.1%; MV: 8.9%: HV: 14%), heparin administered more (LV: 80%, MV: 81%, HV: 87%; P = .007), perioperative mortality appears lower (LV: 11%, MV: 7.3%, HV: 6.5%; P = .095), and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke was lower (LV: 6.5%, MV: 3.6%, HV: 1.5%; P = .006). After adjustment, compared with LV surgeons, higher volume surgeons had lower odds of perioperative mortality (MV: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.97; P = .039; HV: 0.45; 95% CI, 0.16-1.22; P = .12; MV/HV: 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.96; P = .038) and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke (MV: 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.81; P = .011; HV: 0.16; 95% CI, 0.04-0.61; P = .008). Sensitivity analysis found lower adjusted odds for perioperative mortality (although not significant) and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke for higher volume surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI, higher surgeon volume is independently associated with lower perioperative mortality and postoperative stroke, regardless of hospital volume. Future studies could elucidate if TEVAR for non-ruptured BTAI might be delayed and allow stabilization, heparinization, and involvement of a higher TEVAR volume surgeon.

Initial Outcomes of the Gore TAG Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for Endovascular Repair of Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) has dramatically reduced the morbidity and mortality of intervention. Injuries requiring zone 2 coverage of the aorta traditionally require left subclavian artery (LSA) sacrifice or open revascularization. Furthermore, these injuries are associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and long-term morbidity. Here we report 1-year outcomes of total endovascular repair of BTAI with the GORE® TAG® Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for LSA preservation. METHODS: Across 34 investigative sites, 9 patients with BTAI requiring LSA coverage were enrolled in a nonrandomized, prospective study of a single-branched aortic endograft. The thoracic branch endoprosthesis device allows for graft placement proximal to the LSA and incorporates a single side branch for LSA perfusion. RESULTS: This initial cohort included 8 male and 1 female patient with a median age of 43 (22, 76) and 12 months of follow-up. Five total years of follow-up are planned. All participants had grade 3 BTAI. All procedures took place between 2018 and 2019. The median injury severity score was 2 (0, 66). The median procedure time was 109 min (78, 162). All aortic injuries were repaired under general anesthesia and with heparinization. A spinal drain was used in one patient. Post-deployment balloon angioplasty was conducted in one case at the distal landing zone. There was one asymptomatic LSA branch occlusion 6 months after repair. It was attributed to the purposeful proximal deployment of the branch stent to accommodate an early vertebral takeoff. The occlusion did not require revascularization. There were no strokes, mortalities, or aortic adverse events (migration, endoleak, native aortic expansion, dissection, or thrombosis) through 12 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Initial cohort outcomes suggest that endovascular repair of zone 2 BTAI is feasible and has favorable outcomes using the thoracic branch device with LSA preservation. Additional cases and longer-term follow-up are required for a definitive assessment of the device's safety and durability in traumatic aortic injuries.

A 12-year experience in the management of blunt thoracic aortic injury in Otautahi Christchurch.

BACKGROUND: Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is associated with a high mortality and is the second most common cause of death from trauma. The approach to major trauma, imaging technology and advancement in endovascular therapy have revolutionised the management of BTAI. Endovascular therapy has now become the gold standard technique replacing surgery with its high mortality and morbidity in unstable patients. We aim to assess the outcomes following management of BTAI. METHOD: This is a retrospective study of all patients with BTAI between 1 January 2010 and 1 January 2022. Data were obtained from electronic health records. The grading of BTAI severity was done based on the Society of Vascular Surgery (SVS) Criteria. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included in the study analysis. The most common cause of BTAI was due to high-speed motor vehicle accidents (MVA) (36 patients, 72%). Grade 1 and grade 3 BTAI injuries were mostly encountered in 40% and 30% of the study cohort, respectively. Twenty-three patients (46%) underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). There was no secondary aortic re-intervention, conversion to open surgery or aortic-related deaths at 30 days or at most recent follow-up. CONCLUSION: Management of BTAI in our centre compares well with currently published studies. Long-term studies are warranted to guide clinicians in areas of controversy in BTAI management.

Mortality of traumatic chest injury and its predictors across sub-saharan Africa: systematic review and meta-analysis, 2024.

INTRODUCTION: Globally, chest trauma remain as a prominent contributor to both morbidity and mortality. Notably, patients experiencing blunt chest trauma exhibit a higher mortality rate (11.65%) compared to those with penetrating chest trauma (5.63%). AIM: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the mortality rate and its determinants in cases of traumatic chest injuries. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist guided the data synthesis process. Multiple advanced search methods, encompassing databases such as PubMed, Africa Index Medicus, Scopus, Embase, Science Direct, HINARI, and Google Scholar, were employed. The elimination of duplicate studies occurred using EndNote version X9. Quality assessment utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and data extraction adhered to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) format. Evaluation of publication bias was conducted via Egger's regression test and funnel plot, with additional sensitivity analysis. All studies included in this meta-analysis were observational, ultimately addressing the query, what is the pooled mortality rate of traumatic chest injury and its predictors in sub-Saharan Africa? RESULTS: Among the 845 identified original articles, 21 published original studies were included in the pooled mortality analysis for patients with chest trauma. The determined mortality rate was nine (95% CI: 6.35-11.65). Predictors contributing to mortality included age over 50 (AOR 3.5; 95% CI: 1.19-10.35), a time interval of 2-6 h between injury and admission (AOR 3.9; 95% CI: 2.04-7.51), injuries associated with the head and neck (AOR 6.28; 95% CI: 3.00-13.15), spinal injuries (AOR 7.86; 95% CI: 3.02-19.51), comorbidities (AOR 5.24; 95% CI: 2.93-9.40), any associated injuries (AOR 7.9; 95% CI: 3.12-18.45), cardiac injuries (AOR 5.02; 95% CI: 2.62-9.68), the need for ICU care (AOR 13.7; 95% CI: 9.59-19.66), and an Injury Severity Score (AOR 3.5; 95% CI: 10.6-11.60). CONCLUSION: The aggregated mortality rate for traumatic chest injuries tends to be higher in sub-Saharan Africa. Factors such as age over 50 years, delayed admission (2-6 h), injuries associated with the head, neck, or spine, comorbidities, associated injuries, cardiac injuries, ICU admission, and increased Injury Severity Score were identified as positive predictors. Targeted intervention areas encompass the health sector, infrastructure, municipality, transportation zones, and the broader community.

Nonoperative Management for Low-Grade Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the standard of care for the treatment of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) requiring intervention. Data suggest that low-grade BTAI (grade I [intimal tears] or grade II [intramural hematoma]) will resolve spontaneously if treated with nonoperative management (NOM) alone. There has been no comparison specifically between the use of NOM vs TEVAR for low-grade BTAI. We hypothesize that these low-grade injuries can be safely managed with NOM alone. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of all patients with a low-grade BTAI in the Aortic Trauma Foundation Registry from 2016 to 2021 was performed. The study population was 1 primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included complications, ICU length of stay, and ventilator days. RESULTS: A total of 880 patients with BTAI were enrolled. Of the 269 patients with low-grade BTAI, 218 (81%) were treated with NOM alone (81% grade I, 19% grade II), whereas 51 (19%) underwent a TEVAR (20% grade I, 80% grade II). There was no difference in demographic or mechanism of injury in patients with low-grade BTAI who underwent NOM vs TEVAR. There was a difference in mortality between NOM alone and TEVAR (8% vs 18%, p = 0.009). Aortic-related mortality was 0.5% in the NOM group and 4% in the TEVAR group (p = 0.06). Hospital and ICU length of stay and ventilator days were not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: NOM alone is safe and appropriate management for low-grade BTAI, with lower mortality and decreased rates of complication when compared with routine initial TEVAR.

Readmission after thoracic endovascular aortic repair following blunt thoracic aortic injury.

PURPOSE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is increasingly utilized to treat blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI), but post-discharge outcomes remain underexplored. We examined 90-day readmission in patients treated with TEVAR following BTAI. METHODS: Adult patients discharged alive after TEVAR for BTAI in the Nationwide Readmissions Database between 2016 and 2019 were included. Outcomes examined were 90-day non-elective readmission, primary readmission reasons, and 90-day mortality. As a complementary analysis, 90-day outcomes following TEVAR for BTAI were compared with those following TEVAR for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD). RESULTS: We identified 2085 patients who underwent TEVAR for BTAI. The median age was 43 years (IQR, 29-58), 65% of all patients had an ISS ≥ 25, and 13% were readmitted within 90 days. The main primary causes for readmission were sepsis (8.8%), wound complications (6.7%), and neurological complications (6.5%). Two patients developed graft thrombosis as primary readmission reasons. Compared with acute TBAD patients, BTAI patients had a significantly lower rate of readmission within 90 days (BTAI vs. TBAD; 13% vs. 29%; p < .001). CONCLUSION: We found a significant proportion of readmission in patients treated with TEVAR for BTAI. However, the 90-day readmission rate after TEVAR for BTAI was significantly lower compared with acute TBAD, and the common cause for readmission was not related to residual aortic disease or vascular devices. This represents an important distinction from other patient populations treated with TEVAR for acute vascular conditions. Elucidating differences between trauma-related TEVAR readmissions and non-traumatic indications better informs both the clinician and patients of expected post-discharge course. Level of evidence/study type: IV, Therapeutic/care management.

Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with concomitant blunt thoracic aortic injury and traumatic brain injury from the Aortic Trauma Foundation global registry.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) are the top two leading causes of death after blunt force trauma. Patients presenting with concomitant BTAI and TBI pose a specific challenge with respect to management strategy, because the optimal hemodynamic parameters are conflicting between the two pathologies. Early thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is often performed, even for minimal aortic injuries, to allow for the higher blood pressure parameters required for TBI management. However, the optimal timing of TEVAR for the treatment of BTAI in patients with concomitant TBI remains an active matter of controversy. METHODS: The Aortic Trauma Foundation international prospective multicenter registry was used to identify all patients who had undergone TEVAR for BTAI in the setting of TBI from 2015 to 2020. The primary outcomes included delayed ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, in-hospital mortality, and aortic-related mortality. The outcomes were examined among patients who had undergone TEVAR at emergent (<6 vs ≥6 hours) or urgent (<24 vs ≥24 hours) intervals. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients (median age, 43 years; 79% men; median injury severity score, 41) with BTAI (Society for Vascular Surgery BTAI grade 1, 3%; grade 2, 10%; grade 3, 78%; grade 4, 9%) and concomitant TBI who had undergone TEVAR were identified. Emergent repair was performed for 51 patients (51%). Comparing emergent repair (<6 hours) to urgent repair (≥6 hours), no difference was found in delayed cerebral ischemic events (2.0% vs 4.1%; P = .614), in-hospital mortality (15.7% vs 22.4%; P = .389), or aortic-related mortality (2.0% vs 2.0%; P = .996) and no patient had experienced delayed hemorrhagic stroke. Likewise, repairs conducted in an urgent (<24 hours) setting showed no differences compared with those completed in an emergent (≥24 hours) setting regarding delayed ischemic stroke (2.6% vs 4.3%; P = .548), in-hospital mortality (18.2% vs 21.7%; P = .764), or aortic-related mortality (1.3% vs 4.3%; P = .654), and no patient had experienced delayed hemorrhagic stroke. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to prior retrospective efforts, results from the Aortic Trauma Foundation international prospective multicenter registry have demonstrated that neither emergent nor urgent TEVAR for patients with concomitant BTAI and TBI was associated with delayed stroke, in-hospital mortality, or aortic-related mortality. In these patients, the timing of TEVAR did not have an effect on the outcomes. Therefore, the decision to intervene should be guided by individual patient factors rather than surgical timing.

High resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta procedural volume is associated with improved outcomes: An analysis of the AORTA registry.

BACKGROUND: The use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is controversial. We hypothesize that REBOA outcomes are improved in centers with high REBOA utilization. METHODS: We examined the Aortic Occlusion in Resuscitation for Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry over a 5-year period (2014-2018). Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta outcomes were analyzed by stratifying institutions into low-volume (<10), average-volume (11-30), and high-volume (>30) deployment centers. A multivariable model adjusting for volume group, mechanism of injury, signs of life, systolic blood pressure at initiation, operator level, device type, zone of placement, and hemodynamic response to aortic occlusion was created to analyze REBOA mortality and REBOA-related complications. RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-five REBOA placements were included. High-volume centers accounted for 63%, while low accounted for 13%. High-volume institutions were more likely to place a REBOA in the emergency department (81% vs. 63% low volume, p = 0.003), had a lower mean systolic blood pressure at insertion (53 ± 38 vs. 64 ± 40, p = 0.001), and more Zone I deployments (64% vs. 55%, p = 0.002). Median time from admission to REBOA placement was significantly less in patients treated at high-volume centers (15 [7-30] minutes vs. 35 [20-65] minutes, p = 0.001). Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta mortality was significantly higher at low-volume centers (67% vs. 57%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.29; adj p = 0.040), while average- and high-volume centers were similar. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta complications were less frequent at high-/average-volume centers, but did not reach statistical significance (adj p = 0.784). CONCLUSION: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta survival is increased at high versus low utilization centers. Increased experience with REBOA may be associated with earlier deployment and subsequently improved patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management, level IV.

Mortalidad en hospitalizados con traumatismo torácico: variables asociadas, causas y distribución temporal / Associated variables, causes and time distribution of mortality in thoracic trauma patients

Resumen Introducción: Los traumatismos están entre las diez principales causas de muerte a nivel mundial y son la primera en jóvenes. El traumatismo torácico (TT) está presente en un alto porcentaje de las muertes por traumatismos y es la segunda causa de muerte después del traumatismo encefalocraneano. Objetivos: Analizar las variables asociadas a mortalidad, las causas principales y la distribución temporal de la mortalidad en hospitalizados fallecidos con TT. Materiales y Método: Estudio observacional de hospitalizados con TT, período enero de 1981 a diciembre de 2018. Revisión de protocolos prospectivos de TT y base de datos. Se consignaron las causas de muerte sindromáticas principales y se realizó una regresión logística para variables asociadas a mortalidad. Se utilizó SPSS25® con pruebas chi-cuadrado para comparar clasificación, tipo de TT y su distribución temporal, considerando significativo p < 0,05. Resultados: Total 4.297 TT, mortalidad global de 120 (2,8%) casos. Las principales variables independientes asociadas a mortalidad fueron el deterioro fisiológico al ingreso, el hemotórax masivo y el TT por arma de fuego. La principal causa de muerte fue el shock hipovolémico, con diferencias significativas según tipo de TT en las primeras 4 y 24 horas. En la distribución temporal se observó que las muertes con TT penetrante y aislado fueron más precoces y no se evidenció un nuevo peak en la mortalidad luego de la primera semana. Conclusiones: Se observaron variables independientes asociadas a mortalidad en hospitalizados con TT, siendo el deterioro fisiológico al ingreso el factor más importante. Además, existen diferencias significativas en las causas de muerte y distribución temporal de la mortalidad entre diferentes subgrupos de hospitalizados con TT.

Background: Trauma is one of the ten leading causes of death worldwide and the first among the youth. Thoracic trauma (TT) is present in a high percentage of deaths due to trauma and is the second leading cause of death after traumatic brain injury. Aim: To analyze the mortality associated variables, major causes and temporal distribution of mortality among dead hospitalized patients with TT. Materials and Method: Observational study in hospitalized patients with TT, period January 1981 to December 2018. Review of prospective TT protocols and data base. Major syndromic causes of death were recorded and a logistic regression for variables associated with mortality was made. SPSS25® with chi-quadrat tests was used to compare classification, type of TT and temporal distribution. A p value < 0,05 was considered significant. Results: Total 4.297 TT and global mortality was 120 (2,8%) cases. The main independent variables associated with mortality were the physiological decline upon admission, massive hemothorax and TT by firearms. The leading cause of death was hypovolemic shock, with significant differences according to the type of TT in the first 4 and 24 hours. In the temporal distribution was observed that, the deaths with penetrating and isolated TT were earlier and that there was no second peak of mortality following the first week. Conclusions: Independent variables associated with mortality were observed among hospitalized patients with TT, being physiological deterioration the most important factor. Besides, there are significant differences in the death causes and temporal distribution of mortality among the different subgroups of hospitalized patients with TT.

Nationwide utilization of cardiopulmonary bypass in cardiothoracic trauma: A retrospective analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma requires that all level I trauma centers have cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) capabilities immediately available. Despite this mandate, there are limited data on the utilization and clinical outcomes among trauma patients requiring CPB in the management of injuries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the current use of CPB in the care of trauma patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank from 2010 to 2015. Adult patients sustaining cardiothoracic injuries who underwent surgical repair within the first 24 hours of admission were included. Propensity score matching was used to compare outcomes (in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit LOS, and complications) between patients who underwent CPB within the first 24 hours of admission and those with similar injuries who did not receive CPB. RESULTS: A total of 28,481 patients who met the inclusion criteria were identified, of whom 319 underwent CPB. Three-hundred three CPB patients were matched to 895 comparison patients who did not undergo CPB. Overall in-hospital mortality was 35%. Patients who were not treated with CPB had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared with those treated with CBP (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-2.12; p = 0.003); however, complications were significantly lower in those who did not receive CPB (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.86; p = 0.003). Hospital LOS (non-CPB: mean, 13.4 ± 16.3 days; CPB: mean, 14.7 ± 15.1 days; p = 0.23) and intensive care unit LOS (non-CPB: mean, 9.9 ± 10.7 days; CPB: mean, 10.1 ± 9.7 days; p = 0.08) did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: The use of CPB in the initial management of select cardiothoracic injuries is associated with a survival benefit. Further investigation is required to delineate which specific injuries would benefit the most from the use of CPB. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, level IV.

Non-Selective Thoracic Computed Tomography in Trauma Patients Results in Injury Severity Score Inflation.

INTRODUCTION: Extensive research relying on Injury Severity Scores (ISS) reports a mortality benefit from routine non-selective thoracic CTs (an integral part of pan-computed tomography (pan-CT)s). Recent research suggests this mortality benefit may be artifact. We hypothesized that the use of pan-CTs inflates ISS categorization in patients, artificially affecting admission rates and apparent mortality benefit. METHODS: Eight hundred and eleven patients were identified with an ISS >15 with significant findings in the chest area. Patient charts were reviewed and scores were adjusted to exclude only occult injuries that did not affect treatment plan. Pearson chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression were used to compare adjusted cases vs non-adjusted cases. RESULTS: After adjusting for inflation, 388 (47.8%) patients remained in the same ISS category, 378 (46.6%) were reclassified into 1 lower ISS category, and 45 (5.6%) patients were reclassified into 2 lower ISS categories. Patients reclassified by 1 category had a lower rate of mortality (P < 0.001), lower median total hospital LOS (P < .001), ICU days (P < .001), and ventilator days (P = 0.008), compared to those that remained in the same ISS category. CONCLUSION: Injury Severity Score inflation artificially increases survival rate, perpetuating the increased use of pan-CTs. This artifact has been propagated by outdated mortality prediction calculation methods. Thus, prospective evaluations of algorithms for more selective CT scanning are warranted.

Increased mortality with resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta only mitigated by strong unmeasured confounding: An expanded analysis using the National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is being increasingly adopted to manage noncompressible torso hemorrhage, but a recent analysis of the 2015 to 2016 Trauma Quality Improvement Project (TQIP) data set showed that placement of REBOA was associated with higher rates of death, lower extremity amputation, and acute kidney injury (AKI). We expand this analysis by including the 2017 data set, quantifying the potential role of residual confounding, and distinguishing between traumatic and ischemic lower extremity amputation. METHODS: This retrospective study used the 2015 to 2017 TQIP database and included patients older than 18 years, with signs of life on arrival, who had no aortic injury and were not transferred. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusions of the aorta placed after 2 hours were excluded. We adjusted for baseline variables using propensity scores with inverse probability of treatment weighting. A sensitivity analysis was then conducted to determine the strength of an unmeasured confounder (e.g., unmeasured shock severity/response to resuscitation) that could explain the effect on mortality. Finally, lower extremity injury patterns of patients undergoing REBOA were inspected to distinguish amputation indicated for traumatic injury from complications of REBOA placement. RESULTS: Of 1,392,482 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 187 underwent REBOA. After inverse probability of treatment weighting, all covariates were balanced. The risk difference for mortality was 0.21 (0.14-0.29) and for AKI was 0.041 (-0.007 to 0.089). For the mortality effect to be explained by an unmeasured confounder, it would need to be stronger than any observed in terms of its relationship with mortality and with REBOA placement. Eleven REBOA patients underwent lower extremity amputation; however, they all suffered severe traumatic injury to the lower extremity. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence in the TQIP data set to suggest that REBOA causes amputation, and the evidence for its effect on AKI is considerably weaker than previously reported. The increased mortality effect of REBOA is confirmed and could only be nullified by a potent confounder. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management, level IV.

Is there a role for REBOA? A system assessment.

INTRODUCTION: To analyze our experience to quantify potential need for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA). METHODS: Retrospective review of patients over a three-year period who presented as a trauma with hemorrhagic shock. Patients were divided into two groups: REBOA Candidate vs. Non-candidates. Injuries, outcomes, and interventions were compared. RESULTS: Of 7643 trauma activations, only 37 (0.44%) fit inclusion criteria, of which 16 met criteria for candidacy for potential REBOA placement. The groups did not differ in terms of injury severity, physiology, age, timing of intervention, nor massive transfusion. Survival was linked to TRISS (p = 0.01) and Emergency Room Thoracotomy (p = 0.002). Of Candidates, 8 (50%) had injuries that could have benefited from REBOA, while 7 (44%) had injuries that could be associated with potential harm. DISCUSSION: The volume of patients who would potentially benefit from REBOA appears to be small and does not appear to support system wide adoption in the studied region. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Outcomes of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) utilization in trauma patients with and without traumatic brain injuries: A national analysis of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program data set.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage remains a leading cause of death among trauma patients. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta has grown in popularity as an efficient, less invasive alternative to managing patients with noncompressible hemorrhage. The aim of this study to investigate the clinical outcomes of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta use in adult civilian trauma patients with and without concomitant traumatic brain injury. METHODS: This a secondary analysis of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database from the years 2015 to 2017 of adult trauma patients with and without traumatic brain injury and who had a resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta. Patients who were deceased on arrival, required resuscitative thoracotomy, or had missing information regarding traumatic brain injury status were excluded. Multivariable risk adjustment was performed. The primary outcome was inpatient mortality. RESULTS: Of 2,352,542 patients, 199 met the criteria for inclusion in the final analysis. resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta + traumatic brain injury patients were significantly more likely to have a lower Glasgow Coma Scale ≤8 (82.4% vs 54.4%, P < .001) and systolic blood pressure (89 ± 37.4 vs 107.2 ± 39.7; P = .002), and higher injury severity score >25 (83.5% vs 65.8%, P = .01) compared with resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta/non-traumatic brain injury patients. No differences in odds of inpatient mortality (62.4% vs 50.9%, P = .11) or complications (17.7% vs 11.4%, P = .21) were observed between groups. Subgroup analysis based on mechanism of injury, trauma center level, teaching hospital status, and pelvic fracture status also did not show any differences in mortality. CONCLUSION: Inpatient mortality with resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta use does not differ between patients with or without concomitant traumatic brain injury, despite those with traumatic brain injury having significantly higher injury severity and more severe hypotension on intake.

Patterns of pediatric thoracic penetrating injuries: A single-trauma-center experience in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVES: To review the patterns and outcomes of pediatric thoracic penetrating injuries in a level one trauma center. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of pediatric patients who presented to the King Abdulaziz Medical City Emergency Department (KAMC-ED), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia with thoracic penetrating injury from 2001 to 2016. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients had a penetrating injury to the thorax were identified. The mean age was 15.5 ± 3.6 years. The mean length of hospital stay was 3.87 ± 5 days. The most common cause was stabbing followed by gunshot. Isolated injury to the thorax was seen in 58 patients. The most common injuries sustained were pneumothorax and hemothorax. In the ED, tube thoracostomy was required in 65 patients, endotracheal intubation in 12, blood transfusion in 14, massive blood transfusion in one, pericardiocentesis in one, and ED thoracotomy in 2. Only 15 patients required surgical intervention. The overall mortality rate was 3.4%. Death was mainly caused by associated injuries to the heart, aorta and/or inferior vena cava. CONCLUSION: Thoracic injuries represent 25% of the overall penetrating traumas in pediatric age group. Most sustained injuries can be safely managed non-operatively, with a favorable outcome. Prompt resuscitation and intervention are required to identify and manage life-threatening injuries.