Factors Associated With Pelvic Infection After Pre-Peritoneal Pelvic Packing for Hemodynamically Unstable Pelvic Fractures.

Background: Preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) and external fixation has led to improved mortality after devastating pelvic trauma. However, there is limited literature on infection after this intervention. We aim to study the risk factors associated with pelvic infection after PPP. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of patients who underwent PPP at a single level 1 trauma center was performed. Results: Over the 18-year study period, 222 patients were identified. Twenty-three percent of patients had an open fracture. Pelvic angiography was performed in 24% of patients with 16% requiring angioembolization (AE). The average time to packing removal was two (one to two days) days, although 10% of patients had their pelvis re-packed. Overall infection rate was 14% (n = 31); if pelvic re-packing was performed, the infection rate increased to 45%. Twenty-two of the patients with an infection required additional procedures for their infection, and ultimately hardware removal occurred in eight patients. On univariable analysis, patients with pelvic infections had more open fractures (55% vs. 17%; p < 0.01), underwent AE more frequently (29% vs. 14%; p = 0.04), were more likely to undergo repacking (32% vs. 6%; p < 0.01), and had packing in place for longer (2 [1,2] vs. 2 [2,3]; p = 0.01). On logistic multivariable regression analysis, open fracture (odds ratio [OR], 5.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-14.1) and pelvic re-packing (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.2-18.5) were independent risk factors for pelvic infection. Conclusions: Pelvic infection after PPP is a serious complication independently associated with open fracture and re-packing of the pelvis. Re-intervention was required in most patients with infection.

Door to door in 24: factors that allow surgical stabilization of rib fractures within 24 hours of admission.

Background: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) should be performed early after injury. Factors that influence timing remain unknown. Our objective was to identify inherent variables that allow for early identification and treatment. We hypothesized that certain demographic, injury, and logistical factors are associated with SSRF <24 hours from admission. Methods: Retrospective review from an urban level 1 trauma center (10/2010-8/2019). Patients were grouped as SSRF <24 hours from admission vs. ≥24 hours. Demographics, transfer from an outside hospital (OSH), timing documentation, injury descriptors, surgeon on-call, and operative surgeon were collected. SSRF for chronic non-union was excluded. Results: Data from 173 patients were analyzed. Eighty-five patients (49%) were in the <24 hours group and 88 (51%) were in the ≥24 hours group. Baseline demographics were similar between groups. Injury severity was significantly higher in the late group: increased Injury Severity Score (ISS; 16.5 vs. 21.0, P<0.01), lower Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS; 15 vs. 14, P<0.01), more rib fractures (7 vs. 9, P=0.01), and increased incidence of face (6% vs. 16%, P=0.03), spine (22% vs. 47%, P<0.01), and pelvis fractures (8% vs. 25%, P<0.01). Patients admitted on a Wednesday were more likely to undergo early SSRF as compared to other days of the week (P=0.01) There was also a shorter time from the decision to perform SSRF to the actual operation in the early group, as compared to the late group (13 vs. 44 hours, P<0.01). Fifty (28.9%) SSRF cases were performed by the on-call surgeon; this percentage did not differ in the early vs. late group (33% vs. 25%, P=0.25). Patients needing pelvic fixation were more likely to be in the late group. Patients transferred from an OSH for SSRF were more likely to be in the early group (29% vs. 10%, P<0.01). Finally, likelihood of early surgery increased with increasing study year. Conclusions: Approximately one-half of SSRF cases were performed within 24 hours of admission. Factors that influence surgery within 24 hours of admission appear related to overall injury severity and systems issues, including day of admission, transfer from another facility, additional urgent pelvic surgery, and institutional experience with SSRF. Surgeon availability did not drive this disparity.

Early Surgical Stabilization of Rib Fractures is Feasible in Patients With Non-Urgent Operative Pelvic Injuries.

INTRODUCTION: The feasibility of prioritizing surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) in patients with other injuries is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the timing and outcomes of SSRF between patients with and without non-urgent operative pelvic injuries. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, all patients between 2010 and 2020 who underwent SSRF (SSRF group) and those who underwent SSRF and non-urgent operative management of pelvic fractures (SSRF + P group) were included. Demographics, injury characteristics, operative details, and outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Over 11 years, 154 SSRF patients were identified, with 143 patients in the SSRF group (93%) and 11 patients in the SSRF + P group (7%). Median number of rib fractures (7 vs 9, P = .04), total number of fractures (11 vs 15, P < .01), and flail segment (54% vs 91%, P = .02) were higher in SSRF + P group. Median time to SSRF was similar (0 vs 1 day, P = .20) between the 2 groups. Median time to pelvic fixation was 3 days in SSRF + P group and 8 out of 11 patients (73%) underwent SSRF prior to pelvic fixation. Median operative time (137 vs 178 mins, P = .14) and median number of ribs plated (4 vs 5, P = .05) were higher in SSRF + P group. There was no difference in SSRF-related complications, pelvic fracture-related complications from operative positioning, rates of pneumonia, or mortality between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: SSRF can be performed early in patients with non-urgent operative pelvic injuries without a difference in pelvic fracture-related complications, SSRF-related complications, pneumonia, or mortality.

Predictive accuracy of adding shock index to the American College of Surgeons' minimum criteria for full trauma team activation.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons requires trauma centers to use six minimum criteria (ACS-6) for full trauma team activation: hypotension, gunshot wound to the neck or torso, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score < 9, respiratory compromise, transfers receiving blood transfusion, or physician discretion. Our goal was to evaluate the effect of adding varying shock index (SI) thresholds to the ACS-6 in an adult trauma population with the hypothesis that SI would significantly improve sensitivity at the expense of an acceptable decrease in specificity. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of EMS and trauma registry data from an urban Level I trauma center. Consecutive patients > 15 years of age were included from 1993 through 2006. SI at thresholds of ≥0.8, ≥0.85, ≥0.9, and ≥1 were evaluated. Primary outcome was emergency operative (within 1 h of arrival) or procedural (cricothyrotomy or thoracotomy) intervention (EOPI); secondary outcomes were Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15, ISS > 24, a composite of EOPI or ISS > 15, and urgent operative intervention (within 4 h). RESULTS: A total of 20,872 patients were included, 27% with an ISS > 15 and 5% who underwent EOPI. Sensitivity and specificity of the ACS-6 alone for EOPI were 86% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 84% to 88%) and 81% (95% CI = 80% to 81%), respectively. Inclusion of SI thresholds of 0.8, 0.85, 0.9, and 1 resulted in sensitivities of 95% (95% CI = 93% to 96%), 93% (CI = 91% to 94%), 92% (95% CI = 90% to 93%), and 90% (95% CI = 88% to 92%), respectively, and specificities of 52% (95% CI = 51% to 52%), 59% (95% CI = 58% to 59%), 64% (95% CI = 64% to 65%), and 72% (95% CI = 71% to 73%), respectively. Similar trends were found for each secondary outcome. CONCLUSION: The addition of SI to the ACS-6 for trauma team activation increased sensitivity for EOPI with a larger decrease in specificity across all thresholds. Inclusion of a SI threshold of ≥0.9 closely aligns with under- and overtriage benchmarks in this trauma registry cohort using a strict definition of trauma team activation need.

Strategies for successful implementation of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in an urban Level I trauma center.

BACKGROUND: The rationale for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is to control life-threatening subdiaphragmatic bleeding and facilitate resuscitation; however, incorporating this into the resuscitative practices of a trauma service remains challenging. The objective of this study is to describe the process of successful implementation of REBOA use in an academic urban Level I trauma center. All REBOA procedures from April 2014 through December 2019 were evaluated; REBOA was implemented after surgical faculty attended a required and internally developed Advanced Endovascular Strategies for Trauma Surgeons course. Success was defined by sustained early adoption rates. METHODS: An institutional protocol was published, and a REBOA supply cart was placed in the emergency department with posters attached to depict technical and procedural details. A focused professional practice evaluation was utilized for the first three REBOA procedures performed by each faculty member, leading to internal privileging. RESULTS: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta was performed in 97 patients by nine trauma surgeons, which is 1% of the total trauma admissions during this time. Each surgeon performed a median of 12 REBOAs (interquartile range, 5-14). Blunt (77/97, 81%) or penetrating abdominopelvic injuries (15/97, 15%) comprised the main injury mechanisms; 4% were placed for other reasons (4/97), including ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (n = 3) and preoperatively for a surgical oncologic resection (n = 1). Overall survival was 65% (63/97) with a steady early adoption trend that resulted in participation in a Department of Defense multicenter trial. CONCLUSION: Strategies for how departments adopt new procedures require clinical guidelines, a training program focused on competence, and a hospital education and privileging process for those acquiring new skills. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, level V.

Worth looking! venous thromboembolism in patients who undergo preperitoneal pelvic packing warrants screening duplex.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with major pelvic fractures who undergo preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) has not been investigated. We hypothesized that patients who undergo PPP are at high risk for VTE, thus early prophylactic anticoagulation and screening duplex are warranted. STUDY DESIGN: All patients requiring PPP from 2015 to 2019 were reviewed. Management and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: During the study period, 79 patients underwent PPP. Excluding the early deaths, 17 patients had deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and 6 had pulmonary emboli (PE); 4 patients had both DVT/PE. Overall mortality was 15%. Thirty-two patients underwent screening duplex within 72 h of admission and 10 were positive for DVT. CONCLUSION: Patients with complex pelvic trauma undergoing PPP have a 23% incidence of DVT and an additional 8% incidence of PE. 31% of screening ultrasounds are positive. The overall mortality was 15%. With a high incidence of VTE in this patient population, we recommend screening duplex ultrasounds.

Prehospital end-tidal carbon dioxide predicts massive transfusion and death following trauma.

BACKGROUND: The lack of an accurate marker of prehospital hemorrhagic shock limits our ability to triage patients to the correct level of care, delays treatment in the emergency department, and inhibits our ability to perform prehospital interventional research in trauma. End-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) is the measurement of alveolar carbon dioxide concentration at end expiration and is measured noninvasively in the ventilator circuit for intubated patients in continuous manner. Several hospital-based studies have been able to demonstrate that either low or decreasing levels of ETCO2 as well as disparities between ETCO2 and plasma carbon dioxide correlate with increasing mortality in trauma. We hypothesized that prehospital ETCO2 values will be predictive of mortality and need for massive transfusion following injury. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study from an urban level 1 trauma center. We reviewed all intubated adult patients transported for injury who had prehospital ETCO2 values available. Unadjusted comparisons of continuous variables were done with the Wilcoxon two-sample test. The predictive performance of prehospital ETCO2, the prehospital shock index, and prehospital systolic blood pressure were assessed and compared using areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves. Optimal cutoffs were estimated by maximizing the Youden index. Massive transfusion was defined as >10 U of blood or death in 24 hours. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were identified with prehospital ETCO2 values during the 2-year study period. Population was 78.5% male with a median age of 37.5 years (interquartile range, 23.5-53.5 years). Injury mechanism was penetrating in 22.8%. This cohort had a median Injury Severity Score of 26 (interquartile range, 17-36), massive transfusion rate of 34.7%, and mortality of 42.1%. In the evaluation of prediction of postinjury mortality and massive transfusion, ETCO2 outperformed systolic blood pressure and shock index, but these differences did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: End-tidal carbon dioxide is a novel prehospital predictor of mortality and massive transfusion after injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/Epidemiologic, level III.