Disaster planning for a surgical surge: when mass trauma threatens to overwhelm your operating rooms.

Mass casualty events particularly those requiring multiple simultaneous operating rooms are of increasing concern. Existing literature predominantly focuses on mass casualty care in the emergency department. Hospital disaster plans should include a component focused on preparing for multiple simultaneous operations. When developing this plan, representatives from all segments of the perioperative team should be included. The plan needs to address activation, communication, physical space, staffing, equipment, blood and medications, disposition offloading, special populations, and rehearsal.

Are trauma surgeons prepared? A survey of trauma surgeons' disaster preparedness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: US trauma centers (TCs) must remain prepared for mass casualty incidents (MCIs). However, trauma surgeons may lack formal MCI training. The recent COVID-19 pandemic drove multiple patient surges, overloaded Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies, and stressed TCs. This survey assessed trauma surgeons' MCI training, experience, and system and personal preparedness before the pandemic compared with the pandemic's third year. Methods: Survey invitations were emailed to all 1544 members of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma in 2019, and then resent in 2022 to 1575 members with additional questions regarding the pandemic. Questions assessed practice type, TC characteristics, training, experience, beliefs about personal and hospital preparedness, likelihood of MCI scenarios, interventions desired from membership organizations, and pandemic experiences. Results: The response rate was 16.7% in 2019 and 12% in 2022. In 2022, surgeons felt better prepared than their hospitals for pandemic care, mass shootings, and active shooters, but remained feeling less well prepared for cyberattack and hazardous material events, compared with 2019. Only 35% of the respondents had unintentional MCI response experience in 2019 or 2022, and even fewer had experience with intentional MCI. 78% had completed a Stop the Bleed (STB) course and 63% own an STB kit. 57% had engaged in family preparedness activities; less than 40% had a family action plan if they could not come home during an MCI. 100% of the respondents witnessed pandemic-related adverse events, including colleague and coworker illness, patient surges, and resource limitations, and 17% faced colleague or coworker death. Conclusions: Trauma surgeons thought that they became better at pandemic care and rated themselves as better prepared than their hospitals for MCI care, which is an opportunity for them to take greater leadership roles. Opportunities remain to improve surgeons' family and personal MCI preparedness. Surgeons' most desired professional organization interventions include advocacy, national standards for TC preparedness, and online training. Level of evidence: VII, survey of expert opinion.

Blunt pancreatic trauma: A Western Trauma Association critical decisions algorithm.

BACKGROUND: The Western Trauma Association (WTA) has undertaken publication of best practice clinical practice guidelines on multiple trauma topics. These guidelines are based on scientific evidence, case reports, and best practices per expert opinion. Some of the topics covered by this consensus group do not have the ability to have randomized controlled studies completed because of complexity, ethical issues, financial considerations, or scarcity of experience and cases. Blunt pancreatic trauma falls under one of these clinically complex and rare scenarios. This algorithm is the result of an extensive literature review and input from the WTA membership and WTA Algorithm Committee members. METHODS: Multiple evidence-based guideline reviews, case reports, and expert opinion were compiled and reviewed. RESULTS: The algorithm is attached with detailed explanation of each step, supported by data if available. CONCLUSION: Blunt pancreatic trauma is rare and presents many treatment challenges.

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.

Prehospital end-tidal carbon dioxide is predictive of death and massive transfusion in injured patients: An Eastern Association for Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital identification of the injured patient likely to require emergent care remains a challenge. End-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) has been used in the prehospital setting to monitor respiratory physiology and confirmation of endotracheal tube placement. Low levels of ETCO2 have been demonstrated to correlate with injury severity and mortality in a number of in-hospital studies. We hypothesized that prehospital ETCO2 values would be predictive of mortality and need for massive transfusion (MT) in intubated patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective multicenter trial with 24 participating centers. Prehospital, emergency department, and hospital values were collected. Receiver operating characteristic curves were created and compared. Massive transfusion defined as >10 U of blood in 6 hours or death in 6 hours with at least 1 U of blood transfused. RESULTS: A total of 1,324 patients were enrolled. ETCO2 (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC], 0.67; confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.71) was better in predicting mortality than shock index (SI) (AUROC, 0.55; CI, 0.50-0.60) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) (AUROC, 0.58; CI, 0.53-0.62) (p < 0.0005). Prehospital lowest ETCO2 (AUROC, 0.69; CI, 0.64-0.75), SBP (AUROC, 0.75; CI, 0.70-0.81), and SI (AUROC, 0.74; CI, 0.68-0.79) were all predictive of MT. Analysis of patients with normotension demonstrated lowest prehospital ETCO2 (AUROC, 0.66; CI, 0.61-0.71), which was more predictive of mortality than SBP (AUROC, 0.52; CI, 0.47-0.58) or SI (AUROC, 0.56; CI, 0.50-0.62) (p < 0.001). Lowest prehospital ETCO2 (AUROC, 0.75; CI, 0.65-0.84), SBP (AUROC, 0.63; CI, 0.54-0.74), and SI (AUROC, 0.64; CI, 0.54-0.75) were predictive of MT in normotensive patients. ETCO2 cutoff for MT was 26 mm Hg. The positive predictive value was 16.1%, and negative predictive value was high at 98.1%. CONCLUSION: Prehospital ETCO2 is predictive of mortality and MT. ETCO2 outperformed traditional measures such as SBP and SI in the prediction of mortality. ETCO2 may outperform traditional measures in predicting need for transfusion in occult shock. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic test, 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.

Evaluation and management of abdominal stab wounds: A Western Trauma Association critical decisions algorithm.

This is a recommended management algorithm from the Western Trauma Association addressing the management of adult patients with abdominal stab wounds. Because there is a paucity of published prospective randomized clinical trials that have generated Class I data, these recommendations are based primarily on published observational studies and expert opinion of Western Trauma Association members. The algorithm and accompanying comments represent a safe and sensible approach that can be followed at most trauma centers. We recognize that there will be patient, personnel, institutional, and situational factors that may warrant or require deviation from the recommended algorithm. We encourage institutions to use this as a guideline to develop their own local protocols.

Western Trauma Association Critical Decisions in Trauma: Management of rib fractures.

This is a recommended management algorithm from the Western Trauma Association addressing the management of adult patients with rib fractures. Because there is a paucity of published prospective randomized clinical trials that have generated Class I data, these recommendations are based primarily on published observational studies and expert opinion of Western Trauma Association members. The algorithm and accompanying comments represent a safe and sensible approach that can be followed at most trauma centers. We recognize that there will be patient, personnel, institutional, and situational factors that may warrant or require deviation from the recommended algorithm. We encourage institutions to use this as a guideline to develop their own local protocols.

Guidance Document for the Prehospital Use of Tranexamic Acid in Injured Patients.

Tranexamic acid (TXA) is being administered already in many prehospital air and ground systems. Insufficient evidence exists to support or refute the prehospital administration of TXA, and results are pending from several prehospital studies currently in progress. We have created this document to aid agencies and systems in best practices for TXA administration based on currently available best evidence. This document has been endorsed by the American College of Surgeons-Committee on Trauma, the American College of Emergency Physicians, and the National Association of EMS Physicians.

Western Trauma Association Critical Decisions in Trauma: Diagnosis and management of esophageal injuries.

This is a recommended management algorithm from the Western Trauma Association addressing the diagnostic evaluation and management of esophageal injuries in adult patients. Because there is a paucity of published prospective randomized clinical trials that have generated Class I data, the recommendations herein are based primarily on published observational studies and expert opinion of Western Trauma Association members. The algorithms and accompanying comments represent a safe and sensible approach that can be followed at most trauma centers. We recognize that there will be patient, personnel, institutional, and situational factors that may warrant or require deviation from the recommended algorithm. We encourage institutions to use this guideline to formulate their own local protocols.The algorithm contains letters at decision points; the corresponding paragraphs in the text elaborate on the thought process and cite pertinent literature. The annotated algorithm is intended to (a) serve as a quick bedside reference for clinicians; (b) foster more detailed patient care protocols that will allow for prospective data collection and analysis to identify best practices; and (c) generate research projects to answer specific questions concerning decision making in the management of adults with esophageal injuries.