Aggressive imaging protocol for hanging patients yields no significant findings: Over-imaging of hanging injuries.

BACKGROUND: Despite rising rates of hanging injuries, few high-quality data and no national trauma guidelines are available to standardize the evaluation of these patients. We sought to identify the yield of imaging hanging patients at our institution. METHODS: This is a retrospective study at an urban Level I Trauma Center. Charts for patients diagnosed with "Hanging, Strangulation, or Asphyxiation" (ICD-9 E93.0) from February 2008 to March 2014 were reviewed. Frequency of imaging orders and their results were recorded. Logistic regression analyses were done to determine factors associated with increased rates of imaging. RESULTS: 78 patients met inclusion criteria. The average age was 34 years, 86% were male, and 65% were witnessed hangings. In total, 195 CT scans and 67 X-rays were done. Frequency of imaging in our cohort: 77% received CT of the head (CTH); 88% CT of the neck; 85% CT angiography (CTA) of the neck; 86% chest X-ray. Highest-level trauma activation occurred in 76% of patients and was associated with an increased rate of imaging, with the likelihood of CTH being increased by 31% (p < 0.01), CT of the neck without contrast by 19% (p < 0.01), CTA of the neck by 25% (p < 0.01), and chest X-ray by 25% (p < 0.01). Of the 78 patients, none had significant findings that required intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the highest-level trauma activation was associated with increased rates of imaging, but did not alter patient care. A more selective approach in the evaluation of hanging injuries should be considered.

Do Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients Have Increased Chances of Survival When Transported to a Cardiac Resuscitation Center?

Background Patients suffering from an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are often transported to the closest hospital. Although it has been suggested that these patients be transported to cardiac resuscitation centers, few jurisdictions have acted on this recommendation. To better evaluate the evidence on this subject, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the currently available literature evaluating the association between the destination hospital's capability (cardiac resuscitation center or not) and resuscitation outcomes for adult patients suffering from an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest was performed. Methods and Results PubMed, EMBASE , and the Cochrane Library databases were first searched using a specifically designed search strategy. Both original randomized controlled trials and observational studies were considered for inclusion. Cardiac resuscitation centers were defined as having on-site percutaneous coronary intervention and targeted temperature management capability at all times. The primary outcome measure was survival. Twelve nonrandomized observational studies were retained in this review. A total of 61 240 patients were included in the 10 studies that could be included in the meta-analysis regarding the survival outcome. Being transported to a cardiac resuscitation center was associated with an increase in survival (odds ratio=1.95 [95% confidence interval 1.47-2.59], P<0.001). Conclusions Adult patients suffering from an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest transported to cardiac resuscitation centers have better outcomes than their counterparts. When possible, it is reasonable to transport these patients directly to cardiac resuscitation centers (class II a, level of evidence B, nonrandomized). Clinical Trial Registration URL : www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ . Unique identifier: CRD 42018086608.