The unrestricted global effort to complete the COOL trial.

BACKGROUND: Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with negative peritoneal pressure therapy (NPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and attenuate the systemic damage from SCIAS, although there are definite risks of leaving the abdomen open whenever it might possibly be closed. This potential therapeutic paradigm is the rationale being assessed in the Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL trial) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ). Initially, the COOL trial received Industry sponsorship; however, this funding mandated the use of a specific trademarked and expensive NPPT device in half of the patients allocated to the intervention (open) arm. In August 2022, the 3 M/Acelity Corporation without consultation but within the terms of the contract canceled the financial support of the trial. Although creating financial difficulty, there is now no restriction on specific NPPT devices and removing a cost-prohibitive intervention creates an opportunity to expand the COOL trial to a truly global basis. This document describes the evolution of the COOL trial, with a focus on future opportunities for global growth of the study. METHODS: The COOL trial is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial examining the random allocation of SCIAS patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or the use of the OA with an application of an NPPT dressing. Patients are eligible if they have free uncontained intraperitoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR severely adverse predicted clinical outcomes. The primary outcome is intended to definitively inform global practice by conclusively evaluating 90-day survival. Initial recruitment has been lower than hoped but satisfactory, and the COOL steering committee and trial investigators intend with increased global support to continue enrollment until recruitment ensures a definitive answer. DISCUSSION: OA is mandated in many cases of SCIAS such as the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome associated with closure, or a planned second look as for example part of "damage control"; however, improved source control (locally and systemically) is the most uncertain indication for an OA. The COOL trial seeks to expand potential sites and proceed with the evaluation of NPPT agnostic to device, to properly examine the hypothesis that this treatment attenuates systemic damage and improves survival. This approach will not affect internal validity and should improve the external validity of any observed results of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Institutes of Health ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ).

Predictors of retained hemothorax in trauma: Results of an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multi-institutional trial.

BACKGROUND: The natural history of traumatic hemothorax (HTX) remains unclear. We aimed to describe outcomes of HTX following tube thoracostomy drainage and to delineate factors that predict progression to a retained hemothorax (RH). We hypothesized that initial large-volume HTX predicts the development of an RH. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational, multi-institutional study of adult trauma patients diagnosed with an HTX identified on computed tomography (CT) scan with volumes calculated at time of diagnosis. All patients were managed with tube thoracostomy drainage within 24 hours of presentation. Retained hemothorax was defined as blood-density fluid identified on follow-up CT scan or need for additional intervention after initial tube thoracostomy placement for HTX. RESULTS: A total of 369 patients who presented with an HTX initially managed with tube thoracostomy drainage were enrolled from 17 trauma centers. Retained hemothorax was identified in 106 patients (28.7%). Patients with RH had a larger median (interquartile range) HTX volume on initial CT compared with no RH (191 [48-431] mL vs. 88 [35-245] mL, p = 0.013) and were more likely to be older with a higher burden of thoracic injury. After controlling for significant differences between groups, RH was independently associated with a larger HTX on presentation, with a 15% increase in risk of RH for each additional 100 mL of HTX on initial CT imaging (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.21; p < 0.001). Patients with an RH also had higher rates of pneumonia and longer hospital length of stay than those with successful initial management. Retained hemothorax was also associated with worse functional outcomes at discharge and first outpatient follow-up. CONCLUSION: Larger initial HTX volumes are independently associated with RH, and unsuccessful initial management with tube thoracostomy is associated with worse patient outcomes. Future studies should use this experience to assess a range of options for reducing the risk of unsuccessful initial management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management study, level III.

Protecting study participants in emergency research: is community consultation before trial commencement enough?

BACKGROUND: This article presents the results of a community consultation (CC) process completed in Toronto, Ontario, using a random digit dialling technique, on the attitudes and perceptions of the public toward the use of exception from informed consent when conducting emergency research involving the use of massive blood transfusions. METHODS: In 2012, our hospital conducted a CC, using a random digit dialling technique, to elicit the attitudes and perceptions of the public toward the use of an exemption from informed consent for an upcoming clinical trial. A total of 500 participants from high violent crime areas were interviewed as part of this consultation. RESULTS: The response rate for the telephone survey was 54%. Participants indicated a personal acceptance rate of 76%, acceptance of the justification for the exception to consent at 81%, thatthe study would meet the best interest of patients and the community at 81% and that youth (between 15 and 18 years) could be enrolled at 71%. When offered, no participant requested an opt-out wrist band to avoid being enrolled in this study. DISCUSSION: The use of violent crime neighborhoods to locate at risk communities was not effective in identifying the appropriate community of interest for this study. Though only representing a small subpopulation from a large Canadian city, the attitudes noted here is suggestive that Canadians may have a similar level of acceptance as the US based on published studies. However, given the resources needed to undertake this process and that in the end it did not elicit any useful feedback or recommendations for enhancing the safety of participants, the future use of phone surveys as a means of engaging communities should be reconsidered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE LEVEL V: This is a retrospective subanalysis of a CC using a randomized phone dialling technique from a site prior to the start of the Pragmatic Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios Trial. The CC was not designed specifically for research purposes and as such reflect only a case study from a single center. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Pre-result, NCT01545232.