Eleven-Year Experience Treating Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury at a Tertiary Referral Center.

BACKGROUND: Blunt thoracic aortic injury treatment has evolved over the past decade particularly with respect to endovascular intervention options. We investigated the trends in blunt thoracic aortic injury management and outcomes over an 11-year span at the sole tertiary referral center in our state. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who presented to our institution with blunt traumatic aortic injury between 2007 and 2017. Baseline demographics including aortic injury grade, injury severity score, and abbreviated injury scale were collected. Outcomes were compared by type and timing of treatment, which included either nonoperative management, endovascular repair, or open surgical repair. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were performed to examine treatment group differences and factors associated with 30-day mortality. RESULTS: In total, 229 patients were reviewed. The distribution of injury severity was grade 1 (30%), grade 2 (8%), grade 3 (30%), and grade 4 (31%). Overall, 27% of patients underwent endovascular repair, 29% open surgery, and 44% definitive nonoperative management. Over the study period, there was a dramatic decline in open surgery and a corresponding rise in endovascular treatment. Thirty-day mortality for the entire cohort was 22%. Mortality by treatment subgroup was 30% for nonoperative management, 8.2% for endovascular treatment, and 21% for open surgery. Delaying endovascular or open surgical treatment by at least 24 hours after admission was associated with significantly improved 30-day survival. CONCLUSIONS: Procedural intervention, whether endovascular or surgical, is associated with improved mortality compared with nonoperative treatment. Delayed intervention, particularly in the case of high-grade injuries, may allow for initial patient stabilization and improved outcomes.

Current Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism.

PURPOSE: Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a significant cause of morbidity and requires prompt diagnosis and management. While non-surgical approaches have supplanted surgery as primary treatment, surgical pulmonary embolectomy (SPE) remains a vital option for select patients. We review the current management of acute PE, with a focus on surgical therapy. METHODS: A PubMed search was performed to identify literature regarding PE and treatment. Results were filtered to include the most comprehensive publications over the past decade. RESULTS: PE is stratified based on presenting hemodynamic status or degree of mechanical pulmonary arterial occlusion. Although systemic or catheter-guided fibrinolysis is the preferred first-line treatment for the majority of cases, patients who are not candidates should be considered for SPE. Studies demonstrate no mortality benefit of thrombolysis over surgery. Systemic anticoagulation is a mainstay of treatment regardless of intervention approach. Following surgical embolectomy, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been shown to reduce recurrence of thromboembolism. CONCLUSIONS: Acute PE presents with varying degrees of clinical stability. Patients should be evaluated in the context of various available treatment options including medical, catheter-based, and surgical interventions. SPE is a safe and appropriate treatment option for appropriate patients.