Whole Blood Resuscitation for Injured Patients Requiring Transfusion: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Practice Management Guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

INTRODUCTION: Whole blood resuscitation has reemerged as a resuscitation strategy for injured patients. However, the effect of whole blood-based resuscitation on outcomes has not been established. The primary objective of this guideline was to develop evidence-based recommendations on whether whole blood should be considered in civilian trauma patients receiving blood transfusions. METHODS: An EAST working group performed a systematic review and meta-analysis utilizing the GRADE methodology. One PICO question was developed to analyze the effect of whole blood resuscitation in the acute phase on mortality, transfusion requirements, infectious complications, and ICU length of stay. English language studies including adult civilian trauma patients comparing in-hospital whole blood to component therapy were included. Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science were queried. GRADEpro was used to assess quality of evidence and risk of bias. The study was registered on PROSPERO (#CRD42023451143). RESULTS: A total of 21 studies were included. Most patients were severely injured and required blood transfusion, massive transfusion protocol activation, and/or a hemorrhage control procedure in the early phase of resuscitation. Mortality was assessed separately at the following intervals: early (i.e., ED, 3-, or 6-hour), 24-hour, late (i.e., 28- or 30-day), and in-hospital. On meta-analysis, whole blood was not associated with decreased mortality. Whole blood was associated with decreased 4-hour RBC (mean difference -1.82, 95% CI -3.12 to -0.52), 4-hour plasma (mean difference -1.47, 95% CI -2.94 to 0), and 24-hour RBC transfusions (mean difference -1.22, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.19) compared to component therapy. There were no differences in infectious complications or ICU length of stay between groups. CONCLUSION: We conditionally recommend WB resuscitation in adult civilian trauma patients receiving blood transfusions, recognizing that data are limited for certain populations, including women of childbearing age, and therefore this guideline may not apply to these populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Guidelines.

An analysis of police transport in an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial examining prehospital procedures in penetrating trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Police transport (PT) of penetrating trauma patients in urban locations has become routine in certain metropolitan areas; however, whether it results in improved outcomes over prehospital Advanced life support (ALS) transport has not been determined in a multicenter study. We hypothesized that PT would not result in improved outcomes. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults (18+ years) with penetrating trauma to the torso and/or proximal extremity presenting at 25 urban trauma centers. Police transport and ALS patients were allocated via nearest neighbor, propensity matching. Transport mode also examined by Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 1,618 total patients, 294 (18.2%) had PT and 1,324 (81.8%) were by ALS. After matching, 588 (294/cohort) remained. The patients were primarily Black (n = 497, 84.5%), males (n = 525, 89.3%, injured by gunshot wound (n = 494, 84.0%) with 34.5% (n = 203) having Injury Severity Score of 16 or higher. Overall mortality by propensity matching was not different between cohorts (15.6% ALS vs. 15.0% PT, p = 0.82). In severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score ≥16), mortality did not differ between PT and ALS transport (38.8% vs. 36.0%, respectively; p = 0.68). Cox regression analysis controlled for relevant factors revealed no association with a mortality benefit in patients transported by ALS. CONCLUSION: Police transport of penetrating trauma patients in urban locations results in similar outcomes compared with ALS. Immediate transport to definitive trauma care should be emphasized in this patient population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.

An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial examining prehospital procedures in penetrating trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital procedures (PHP) by emergency medical services (EMS) are performed regularly in penetrating trauma patients despite previous studies demonstrating no benefit. We sought to examine the influence of PHPs on outcomes in penetrating trauma patients in urban locations where transport to trauma center is not prolonged. We hypothesized that patients without PHPs would have better outcomes than those undergoing PHP. METHODS: This was an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma-sponsored, multicenter, prospective, observational trial of adults (18+ years) with penetrating trauma to the torso and/or proximal extremity presenting at 25 urban trauma centers. The impact of PHPs and transport mechanism on in-hospital mortality were examined. RESULTS: Of 2,284 patients included, 1,386 (60.7%) underwent PHP. The patients were primarily Black (n = 1,527, 66.9%) males (n = 1,986, 87.5%) injured by gunshot wound (n = 1,510, 66.0%) with 34.1% (n = 726) having New Injury Severity Score of ≥16. A total of 1,427 patients (62.5%) were transported by Advanced Life Support EMS, 17.2% (n = 392) by private vehicle, 13.7% (n = 312) by police, and 6.7% (n = 153) by Basic Life Support EMS. Of the PHP patients, 69.1% received PHP on scene, 59.9% received PHP in route, and 29.0% received PHP both on scene and in route. Initial scene vitals differed between groups, but initial emergency department vitals did not. Receipt of ≥1 PHP increased mortality odds (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.83; p = 0.04). Logistic regression showed increased mortality with each PHP, whether on scene or during transport. Subset analysis of specific PHP revealed that intubation (OR, 10.76; 95% CI, 4.02-28.78; p < 0.001), C-spine immobilization (OR, 5.80; 95% CI, 1.85-18.26; p < 0.01), and pleural decompression (OR, 3.70; 95% CI, 1.33-10.28; p = 0.01) had the highest odds of mortality after adjusting for multiple variables. CONCLUSION: Prehospital procedures in penetrating trauma patients impart no survival advantage and may be harmful in urban settings, even when performed during transport. Therefore, PHP should be forgone in lieu of immediate transport to improve patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level III.