Antibiotic Duration Following Abdominal Gunshot Injuries With Associated Pelvis or Spine Involvement: A 20-Year Single-Center Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Optimal antimicrobial prophylaxis duration following gunshot wounds (GSW) to the abdomen with an associated orthopedic fracture is unknown. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of short versus long courses of prophylactic antibiotics following penetrating hollow viscus injury with communicating orthopedic fracture. METHODS: This retrospective study included adult patients admitted to the trauma service over a 20-y period who sustained an abdominal GSW with hollow viscus injury and communicating spine or pelvic fractures. Patients were stratified into cohorts based on prophylactic antibiotic duration: short course (SC, ≤48 h) and long course (>48 h). The primary outcome was the incidence of osteomyelitis and meningitis up to 1-y postinjury. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay and the incidence of multidrug-resistant organisms and Clostridioides difficile infections. Risk factors for osteomyelitis and meningitis were determined. RESULTS: A total of 125 patients were included with 45 (36%) in the SC group. Median prophylactic antibiotic durations were SC, 1 (interquartile range [IQR], 1-2) versus long course, 7 (IQR, 5-7) d (P < 0.001). There was no difference in osteomyelitis and meningitis incidence (2 [4.4%] versus 4 [5%], P = 0.77). Median hospital length of stay (7 [IQR, 6-11] versus 9 [IQR, 6-15] d, P = 0.072) and incidence of multidrug-resistant organisms (6 [13.3%] versus 13 [16.3%], P = 0.86) and Clostridioides difficile infections (0 [0%] versus 1 [1.3%], P = 0.77) were similar between groups. There were no independent risk factors identified for osteomyelitis or meningitis. CONCLUSIONS: A shorter course of antibiotic prophylaxis ≤48 h may be adequate following abdominal GSW that traverses a hollow viscus and results in pelvic fracture or spinal column injury.

Acute Pain Management in Traumatically Injured Patients With Outpatient Buprenorphine Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Acute pain management is challenging in trauma patients undergoing outpatient buprenorphine therapy at the time of injury due to the high binding affinity of this partial agonist. The purpose of this study was to evaluate acute pain management in admitted trauma patients with discontinued versus continued outpatient buprenorphine therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included adult trauma patients admitted to a level-1 trauma center between January 2017 and August 2020 who were receiving buprenorphine prior to admission. Groups were defined as buprenorphine discontinued (BD) or continued (BC) during hospitalization. The primary outcome compared median daily morphine milligram equivalents between groups. Secondary outcomes utilized patient-reported numeric rating scale (NRS) scores to compare incidences of no pain (NRS 0), mild (NRS 1-3), moderate (NRS 4-6), and severe (NRS 7-10) pain. RESULTS: A total of 57 patients were included (BD 37 [64.9%] and BC 20 [35.1%]). The median (interquartile range) outpatient daily buprenorphine dose was similar between groups (8 [8-16] mg versus 16 [8-16], P = 0.25). Median daily morphine milligram equivalents was significantly higher during admission in the BD group (103.7 [80.7-166] versus 67 [30.8-97.4], P = 0.002). Incidence of no pain (7.1% versus 5.7%, P = 0.283), mild (5.5% versus 4.3%, P = 0.295), moderate (20.2%, 19.8%, P = 0.855), or severe (67.2% versus 70.2%, P = 0.185) pain was similar between BD and BC groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Continuation of outpatient buprenorphine therapy in acute trauma patients is associated with decreased daily opioid requirements and similar analgesic efficacy compared to patients with BD. Based on our findings, trauma patients receiving outpatient buprenorphine and not requiring ventilator support may benefit from buprenorphine continuation within 48 h of initial presentation.

Reversal of apixaban and rivaroxaban with andexanet alfa prior to invasive or surgical procedures.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes following andexanet alfa reversal of factor Xa inhibitors in patients requiring urgent or emergent invasive procedures are lacking. This study aimed to describe efficacy and safety outcomes following andexanet alfa administration within 24 h of an invasive procedure. METHODS: This single-center, observational, retrospective study included patients who received andexanet alfa within 24 h of an invasive or surgical procedure. The primary outcome was hemostatic efficacy graded as excellent, good, or poor using similar definitions to the ANNEXA-4 criteria. Secondary outcomes included hospital discharge disposition, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, 30-day mortality, 30-day thromboischemic event rates, and serum coagulation assay changes pre- and postreversal. RESULTS: Forty-four patients met inclusion criteria; of these, 27 (62.8%) received apixaban and 16 (37.2%) were treated with rivaroxaban prior to admission. The indications for reversal were categorized as intracranial (n = 20 [45.5%]) or extracranial (n = 24 [54.5%]) sites. Majority of patients required emergent operative procedures (18 [40.9%]), followed by invasive device placement (10 [22.7%]) or arterial embolization (9 [20.5%]). Thirty-eight (86.4%) patients were able to be adequately graded for hemostatic efficacy. Overall, 30 (78.9%) patients achieved excellent or good hemostasis within 24 h after periprocedural administration of andexanet alfa (19 [82.6%] apixaban vs. 11 [78.6%] rivaroxaban; 12 [80.0%] intracranial events vs. 18 [78.3%] extracranial events). Discharge disposition was most often to a short- or long-term care facilities (27 [61.4%]). Thirty-day mortality and thromboischemic complications occurred in 15 (34.1%) and 12 (27.3%) patients, respectively. Prothrombin time and antifactor Xa assay results were significantly decreased after andexanet alfa administration (p < 0.05) while thromboelastogram assay values (reaction time, kinetic time, and activated clotting time) showed nonsignificant changes pre- versus postreversal. CONCLUSION: Andexanet alfa may be used for urgent or emergent reversal of apixaban and rivaroxaban peri-procedurally with promising hemostatic outcomes. Further prospective, comparative clinical research is warranted.

Retrospective Evaluation of Intrapleural Tissue Plasminogen Activator With or Without Dornase Alfa for the Treatment of Traumatic Retained Hemothorax: A 6-Year Experience.

BACKGROUND: Intrapleural fibrinolytic instillation is second-line treatment for retained hemothorax. Dornase alfa (DNase) has demonstrated efficacy in parapneumonic effusion, but the lack of deoxyribonucleoproteins limits direct extrapolation to traumatic retained hemothorax treatment. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effectiveness of intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) with and without DNase in the treatment of retained traumatic hemothorax. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients aged 16 years and older admitted to a level 1 trauma center from January 2013 through July 2019 with retained hemothorax and one or more intrapleural tPA instillations. Exclusion criteria were tPA for other indications or concomitant empyema. The primary endpoint was treatment failure defined as the need for operative intervention. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included (tPA alone: 28; tPA with DNase: 22). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, including time to diagnosis (6.5 [interquartile range (IQR), 4-15.5] days vs 6 [IQR, 6.3-10.8] days, P = 0.52). Median tPA dose per treatment (6 [IQR, 6-6.4] mg vs 10 [IQR, 8.4-10] mg, P < 0.001) and cumulative tPA (18 [IQR, 6.5-24] mg vs 30 [IQR, 29.5-40], P < 0.001) dose were significantly lower in the tPA alone group. Treatment failure was similar between groups. Chest tube output, retained hemothorax reduction, and bleeding incidences were similar between groups. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated no significant risk factors for treatment failure. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Dornase alfa added to tPA may not reduce the need for operation to treat retained hemothorax. Further studies should be directed at optimal tPA dose determination and economic impact of inappropriate DNase use.

Impact of Weight on Anti-Xa Attainment in High-Risk Trauma Patients on Enoxaparin Chemoprophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Serum anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) concentration may guide low molecular weight heparin chemoprophylaxis in trauma patients. Higher total body weight (TBW) is a risk factor for subprophylactic anti-Xa and venous thromboembolism (VTE). The purpose of this study was to evaluate TBW differences in patients with subprophylactic versus prophylactic trough anti-Xa. METHODS: This retrospective study included adults admitted to the trauma service who received enoxaparin chemoprophylaxis, trough anti-Xa assessment, and screening duplex ultrasound. Initial enoxaparin dose was determined per trauma team weight-tiered protocol with subsequent 10 mg increase if anti-Xa was subprophylactic. Patients were stratified into subprophylactic (anti-Xa <0.1 IU/ml) and prophylactic (anti-Xa ≥0.1 IU/mL) groups. The primary outcome was difference in TBW. Secondary outcomes were weight-adjusted enoxaparin dose (mg/kg), VTE, red blood cell (pRBC) transfusions. RESULTS: A total of 887 patients were included with 681 (76.8%) having subprophylactic anti-Xa. The subprophylactic group had significantly younger age, higher proportion male sex, higher Injury Severity Score (ISS), higher BMI, and longer length of hospital stay. The subprophylactic group had higher TBW (median [IQR], 87.8 [74-102] kg vs. 78.9 [68-91.8] kg; P < 0.001) which equated to a lower weight-adjusted dose (0.34 [0.3-0.41] mg/kg vs. 0.38 (0.33-0.44) mg/kg; P < 0.001). There were no differences in VTE (10.4% vs. 9.2%; P = 0.71) or pRBC administration (17.0% vs. 16.0%; P = 0.81). CONCLUSIONS: TBW is higher and weight-adjusted enoxaparin dose is lower in high-risk trauma patients with subprophylactic anti-Xa concentrations. These data suggest TBW should be considered when determining the optimal prophylactic enoxaparin dose in high-risk trauma patients.