Propensity weighted analysis of chemical venous thromboembolism prophylaxis agents in isolated severe traumatic brain injury: An EAST sponsored multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), clinicians must balance preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE) with the risk of intracranial hemorrhagic expansion (ICHE). We hypothesized that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) would not increase risk of ICHE or VTE as compared to unfractionated heparin (UH) in patients with severe TBI. METHODS: Patients ≥ 18 years of age with isolated severe TBI (AIS ≥ 3), admitted to 24 level I and II trauma centers between January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2020 and who received subcutaneous UH and LMWH injections for chemical venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (VTEP) were included. Primary outcomes were VTE and ICHE after VTEP initiation. Secondary outcomes were mortality and neurosurgical interventions. Entropy balancing (EBAL) weighted competing risk or logistic regression models were estimated for all outcomes with chemical VTEP agent as the predictor of interest. RESULTS: 984 patients received chemical VTEP, 482 UH and 502 LMWH. Patients on LMWH more often had pre-existing conditions such as liver disease (UH vs LMWH 1.7 % vs. 4.4 %, p = 0.01), and coagulopathy (UH vs LMWH 0.4 % vs. 4.2 %, p < 0.001). There were no differences in VTE or ICHE after VTEP initiation. There were no differences in neurosurgical interventions performed. There were a total of 29 VTE events (3 %) in the cohort who received VTEP. A Cox proportional hazards model with a random effect for facility demonstrated no statistically significant differences in time to VTE across the two agents (p = 0.44). The LMWH group had a 43 % lower risk of overall ICHE compared to the UH group (HR = 0.57: 95 % CI = 0.32-1.03, p = 0.062), however was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: In this multi-center analysis, patients who received LMWH had a decreased risk of ICHE, with no differences in VTE, ICHE after VTEP initiation and neurosurgical interventions compared to those who received UH. There were no safety concerns when using LMWH compared to UH. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Therapeutic Care Management.

Stroke Prevention in Blunt Cerebrovascular Injury: Role of Aspirin 81 mg.

BACKGROUND: The stroke rate in blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) varies from 25% without treatment to less than 8% with antithrombotic therapy. There is no consensus on the optimal management to prevent stroke BCVI. We investigated the efficacy and safety of oral Aspirin (ASA) 81 mg to prevent BCVI-related stroke compared to historically reported stroke rates with ASA 325 mg and heparin. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study included adult trauma patients who received oral ASA 81 mg for BCVI management between 2013 and 2022. Medical records were reviewed for demographic and injury characteristics, imaging findings, treatment-related complications, and outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients treated with ASA 81 mg for BCVI were identified. The mean age was 41.50 years, and 61.9% were male. The mean Injury Severity Score and Glasgow Coma Scale were 19.82 and 12.12, respectively. A total of 101 vessel injuries were identified, including vertebral artery injuries in 56.4% and carotid artery injuries in 44.6%. Traumatic brain injury was found in 42.9%, and 16.7% of patients had a solid organ injur. Biffl grade I (52.4%) injury was the most common, followed by grade II (37.6%) and grade III (4.9%). ASA 81 mg was started in the first 24 hours in 67.9% of patients, including 20 patients with traumatic brain injury and 8 with solid organ injuries. BCVI-related stroke occurred in 3 (3.5%) patients with Biffl grade II (n = 2) and III (n = 1). ASA-related complications were not identified in any patient. The mean length of stay in the hospital was 10.94 days, and 8 patients died during hospitalization due to complications of polytrauma. Follow-up with computed tomography angiography was performed in 8 (9.5%) patients, which showed improvement in 5 and a stable lesion in 3 at a mean time of 58 days after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of clear guidelines regarding appropriate medication, BCVI management should be individualized case-by-case through a multidisciplinary approach. ASA 81 mg is a viable option for BCVI-related stroke prevention compared to the reported stroke rates (2%-8%) with commonly used antithrombotics like heparin and ASA 325 mg. Future prospective studies are needed to provide insight into the safety and efficacy of the current commonly used agent in managing BCVI.

Tranexamic acid is not associated with a higher rate of thrombotic-related reintervention after major vascular injury repair.

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid (TXA) is associated with lower mortality and transfusion requirements in trauma patients, but its role in thrombotic complications associated with vascular repairs remains unclear. We investigated whether TXA increases the risk of thrombosis-related technical failure (TRTF) in major vascular injuries (MVI). METHODS: The PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment (PROOVIT) registry was queried from 2013 to 2022 for MVI repaired with an open or endovascular intervention. The relationship between TXA administration and TRTF was examined. RESULTS: The TXA group (n = 297) had higher rates of hypotension at admission (33.6% vs. 11.5%, p < 0.001), need for continuous vasopressors (41.4% vs. 18.4%, p < 0.001), and packed red blood cell transfusion (3.2 vs. 2.0 units, p < 0.001) during the first 24 hours compared with the non-TXA group (n = 1941), although demographics, injury pattern, and interventions were similar. Cryoprecipitate (9.1% vs. 2%, p < 0.001), and anticoagulant administration during the intervention (32.7% vs. 43.8%, p < 0.001) were higher in the TXA group; there was no difference in the rate of factor VII use between groups (1% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.485). Thrombosis-related technical failure was not different between the groups (6.3% vs. 3.8 p = 0.141) while the rate of immediate need for reoperation (10.1% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.006) and overall reoperation (11.4% vs. 7%, p = 0.009) was significantly higher in the TXA group on univariate analysis. There was no significant association between TXA and a higher rate of immediate need for reintervention (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.88; p = 0.465), overall reoperation rate (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.82-2.17; p = 0.249) and thrombotic events in a repaired vessel (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.60-1.92; p = 0.806) after adjusting for type of injury, vasopressor infusions, blood product and anticoagulant administration, and hemodynamics. CONCLUSION: Tranexamic acid is not associated with a higher risk of thrombosis-related technical failure in traumatic injuries requiring major vascular repairs. Further prospective studies to examine dose-dependent or time-dependent associations between TXA and thrombotic events in MVIs are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Treatment and outcomes of anticoagulated geriatric trauma patients with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage after falls.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency physicians and trauma surgeons are increasingly confronted with pre-injury direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The objective of this study was to assess if pre-injury DOACs, compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKA), or no oral anticoagulants is independently associated with differences in treatment, mortality and inpatient rehabilitation requirement. METHODS: We performed a review of the prospectively maintained institutional trauma registry at an urban academic level 1 trauma center. We included all geriatric patients (aged ≥ 65 years) with tICH after a fall, admitted between January 2011 and December 2018. Multivariable logistic regression analysis controlling for demographics, comorbidities, vital signs, and tICH types were performed to identify the association between pre-injury anticoagulants and reversal agent use, neurosurgical interventions, inhospital mortality, 3-day mortality, and discharge to inpatient rehabilitation. RESULTS: A total of 1453 tICH patients were included (52 DOAC, 376 VKA, 1025 control). DOAC use was independently associated with lower odds of receiving specific reversal agents [odds ratio (OR) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15-0.54] than VKA patients. DOAC use was independently associated with requiring neurosurgical intervention (OR 3.14, 95% CI 1.36-7.28). VKA use, but not DOAC use, was independently associated with inhospital mortality, or discharge to hospice care (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.15-2.27) compared to controls. VKA use was independently associated with higher odds of discharge to inpatient rehabilitation (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.06-1.87) compared to controls. CONCLUSION: Despite the higher neurosurgical intervention rates, patients with pre-injury DOAC use were associated with comparable rates of mortality and discharge to inpatient rehabilitation as patients without anticoagulation exposure. Future research should focus on risk assessment and stratification of DOAC-exposed trauma patients.

Abdominal Wall Thickness Predicts Surgical Site Infection in Emergency Colon Operations.

BACKGROUND: Body mass index (BMI) does not reliably predict Surgical site infections (SSI). We hypothesize that abdominal wall thickness (AWT) would serve as a better predictor of SSI for patients undergoing emergency colon operations. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated our Emergency Surgery Database (2007-2018). Emergency colon operations for any indication were included. AWT was measured by pre-operative CT scans at 5 locations. Only superficial and deep SSIs were considered as SSI in the analysis. Univariate then multivariable analyses were used to determine predictors of SSI. RESULTS: 236 patients met inclusion criteria. The incidence of post-operative SSI was 25.8% and the median BMI was 25.8kg/m2 [22.5-30.1]. The median AWT between patients with and without SSI was significantly different (2.1cm [1.4, 2.8] and 1.8cm [1.2, 2.5], respectively). A higher BMI trended toward increased rates of SSI, but this was not statistically significant. In overweight (BMI 25-29.9kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥30kg/m2) patients, SSI versus no SSI rates were (50.0% versus 41.9% and 47.4% versus 36.4%, P = 0.365 and 0.230) respectively. The incidence of SSI in patients with an average AWT < 1.8cm was 20% and 30% for patients with average AWT ≥1.8cm. On multivariable analysis, AWT ≥1.8cm at 2cm inferior to umbilicus was an independent predictor of SSI (OR 2.98, 95%CI 1.34-6.63, P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: AWT is a better predictor of SSI than BMI. Preoperative imaging of AWT may direct intraoperative decisions regarding wound management. Future clinical outcomes research in emergency surgery should include abdominal wall thickness as an important patient variable.

Where Did All the Appendicitis Go? Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Volume, Management, and Outcomes of Acute Appendicitis in a Nationwide, Multicenter Analysis.

Objective: The study objective was to evaluate effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on rates of emergency department (ED) acute appendicitis presentation, management strategies, and patient outcomes. Summary Background Data: Acute appendicitis is the most commonly performed emergency surgery in the United States and is unlikely to improve without medical or surgical intervention. Dramatic reductions in ED visits prompted concern that individuals with serious conditions, such as acute appendicitis, were deferring treatment for fear of contracting COVID-19. Methods: Patients from 146 hospitals with diagnosed appendicitis and arrival between March 2016 and May 2020 were selected. Electronic medical records data were retrospectively reviewed to retrieve patient data. Daily admissions were averaged from March 2016 through May 2019 and compared with March 2020. April-specific admissions were compared across the 5-year pre-COVID-19 period to April 2020 to identify differences in volume, demographics, disease severity, and outcomes. Results: Appendicitis patient admissions in 2020 decreased throughout March into April, with April experiencing the fewest admissions. April 2020 experienced a substantial decrease in patients who presented with appendicitis, dropping 25.4%, from an average of 2030 patients (2016-2019) to 1516 in 2020. An even greater decrease of 33.8% was observed in pediatric patients (age <18). Overall, 77% of the 146 hospitals experienced a reduction in appendicitis admissions. There were no differences between years in percent of patients treated nonoperatively (P = 0.493) incidence of shock (P = 0.95), mortality (P = 0.24), or need for postoperative procedures (P = 0.81). Conclusions: Acute appendicitis presentations decreased significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic, while overall management and patient outcomes did not differ from previous years. Further research is needed focusing on putative explanations for decreased hospital presentations unrelated to COVID-19 infection and possible implications for surgical management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis.Keywords: acute appendicitis, COVID-19, decreasing volumes, multicenter study.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Are a Potential Alternative to Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Thromboprophylaxis in Trauma Patients Sustaining Lower Extremity Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Trauma patients are at a significant risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), with lower extremity fractures (LEF) being independent risk factors. Use of direct oral anticoagusants (DOACs) for VTE prophylaxis is effective in elective orthopedic surgery, but currently not approved for trauma patients. The primary objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of thromboprophylaxis of DOACs with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in trauma patients sustaining LEF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included adult trauma patients admitted to trauma quality improvement program participating trauma centers (between 2013 and 2016), who sustained LEF and were started on DOACs or LMWH for thromboprophylaxis after admission. Propensity score matching was performed to compare symptomatic VTE and bleeding control interventions between the groups. RESULTS: Of 1,009,922 patients in trauma quality improvement program, 167,640 met inclusion criteria (165,009 received LMWH and 2631 received DOACs). After propensity score matching, 2280 predominantly elderly (median age: 67 y) isolated femur fracture patients (median ISS: 10) were included in each group (4560 patients in total). Symptomatic VTE occurred in 1.4% of patients in both matched groups (P = 0.992). Bleeding control interventions occurred less often in the DOAC group, albeit statistically insignificant (5.8% versus 6.0%, P = 0.772). CONCLUSIONS: This study found similar rates of VTE and bleeding control measures for thromboprophylaxis with DOACs or LMWH in matched trauma patients with LEF. Further prospective research is warranted to consolidate the safety of DOAC thromboprophylaxis in trauma patients with LEF. Favorable oral administration and likely increased adherence could benefit this high-risk population.

Evaluation of oral factor Xa inhibitor-associated extracranial bleeding reversal with andexanet alfa.

INTRODUCTION: A reversal agent for factor Xa (FXa) inhibitors, andexanet alfa, was Food and Drug Administration approved without extensive study of clinical effectiveness, due to an overwhelming demand for FXa inhibitor reversal. In this study, we aimed to describe patient selection, clinical effectiveness, and safety of FXa inhibitor reversal with andexanet alfa in patients presenting with extracranial bleeding. METHODS: Consecutive patients who received andexanet alfa for reversal of FXa inhibitor-associated extracranial hemorrhage were identified. The primary outcome of interest was hemostatic efficacy, assessed using the Sarode et al criteria. Secondary outcomes of interest included incidence of thrombotic episodes post-reversal until discharge and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients met the inclusion criteria (61.9% male, mean age: 73 years). Anticoagulation reversal with andexanet alfa was deemed effective (excellent [n = 3], good [n = 7]) in 10 (47.6%) patients, and poor in 11 patients (52.4%). Eight (38.1%) patients died, of which three were surgically managed, with all causes of death attributed to hemorrhage. Six ischemic complications occurred in four patients (19.0%); ischemic stroke (n = 2], pulmonary embolism (n = 1), deep vein thrombosis (n = 1), liver ischemia (n = 1), and bowel ischemia (n = 1). CONCLUSION: We report poor overall outcomes, a low rate of hemostatic effectiveness, and a high rate of ischemic complications and mortality in this retrospective analysis of oral FXa inhibitor reversal with andexanet alfa for extracranial bleeds. More rigorous epidemiological, and ideally randomized studies, are needed to determine the role of andexanet alfa for FXa inhibitor-associated bleeding for extracranial hemorrhages, where large variation in severity and presentation exists.

Consequences of pre-injury utilization of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with traumatic brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The rapid adoption and widespread use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has outpaced research efforts to establish their effects in bleeding trauma patients. In patients with complicated traumatic brain injury (TBI) caused by intracranial hemorrhage, DOAC use may be associated with higher bleeding volume and potentially more disastrous sequelae than use of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). In the current systematic review and meta-analysis we set out to evaluate the literature on the relationship between preinjury DOAC use and course of the intracranial hemorrhage. (ICH), its treatment and mortality rates in TBI patients, and to compare these outcomes to those of patients with preinjury VKA use. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched using a search strategy including three main terms: "traumatic brain injury," "direct oral anticoagulants," and "vitamin K antagonists." There were 1,446 abstracts screened, and ultimately, six included articles. Random effects modeling meta-analysis was performed on in-hospital mortality, ICH progression and neurosurgical intervention rate. RESULTS: All cohorts had similar baseline and emergency department parameters. Within individual studies surgery rate, reversal agents used, ICH progression and in-hospital mortality differed significantly between DOAC and VKA cohorts. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-4.06; I = 76%; p = 0.97), neurosurgical interventions (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.14-1.63; p = 0.24), or ICH progression rates (OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 0.32-10.66; p = 0.49) between patients that used preinjury DOACs versus patients that used VKAs. CONCLUSION: Direct oral anticoagulant-using mild TBI patients do not appear to be at an increased risk of in-hospital mortality, nor of increased ICH progression or surgery rates, compared with those taking VKAs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, level III.

Do Not Blame the Resident: the Impact of Surgeon and Surgical Trainee Experience on the Occurrence of Intraoperative Adverse Events (iAEs) in Abdominal Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are defined as inadvertent injuries that occur during an operation and are associated with increased mortality, morbidity, and health care costs. We sought to study the impact of attending surgeon experience as well as resident training level on the occurrence of iAEs. DESIGN: The institutional American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and administrative databases for abdominal surgeries were linked and screened for iAEs using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification-based Patient Safety Indicator "accidental puncture/laceration." Each flagged record was systematically reviewed to confirm iAE occurrence and determine the number of years of independent practice of the attending surgeon and the postgraduate year (PGY) of the assisting resident at the time of the operation. The attending surgeon experience was divided into quartiles (<6 years, 6-13 years, 13-20 years, >20 years). The resident experience level was defined as Junior (PGY-1 to PGY-3) or Senior (PGY-4 or PGY-5). Univariate/bivariate then multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and operation type and/or complexity (using RVUs as a proxy) were performed to assess the independent impact of resident and attending surgeon experience on the occurrence of iAEs. SETTING: A large tertiary care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients included in the 2007-2012 ACS-NSQIP that had an abdominal surgery performed by both an attending surgeon and a resident. RESULTS: A total of 7685 operations were included and iAEs were detected in 159 of them (2.1%). Junior residents participated in 1680 cases (21.9%), while senior residents were involved in 6005 (78.1%). The iAE rates for attending surgeons with <6, 6-13, 13-20, and >20 years of experience were 2.7%, 1.7%, 2.4%, and 1.4%, respectively. In multivariable analyses, the risk of occurrence of an iAE was significantly decreased for surgeons with >20 years of experience compared to those with <6 years of experience (odds ratio=0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.86, p = 0.011). On bivariate analyses, iAEs occurred in 1.2% of junior resident cases, while senior residents had an iAE rate of 2.3%. However, after risk adjustment on multivariable analyses, the resident experience level did not significantly impact the rate of iAEs. CONCLUSIONS: The surgeon's level of experience, but not the resident's, is associated with the occurrence of iAEs in abdominal surgery. Efforts to improve patient safety in surgery should explore the value of pairing junior surgeons with the more experienced ones thru formalized coaching programs, rather than focus on curbing resident operative autonomy.

Early unplanned trauma readmissions in a safety net hospital are resource intensive but not due to resource limitations.

BACKGROUND: In an era of decreasing reimbursements, the incentive to decrease readmissions has never been greater. It has been suggested that trauma readmission is an indicator of poor hospital care or fragmented discharge. Even though trauma readmissions are relatively low, readmissions add significant cost, tie up already limited resources and lead to worse outcomes, including mortality. The literature on trauma readmissions is sparse, and the reasons and risk factors for readmission are inconsistent across studies. If readmissions are to serve as useful indicators of quality of care, we must elucidate factors that may predict readmissions. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all admissions to our urban Level I trauma center from July 1, 2012, to June 30, 2015. All patients aged 16 years or older who were discharged alive were included. We identified all unplanned readmissions that occurred within 30 days of discharge and performed an extensive chart review to determine the reasons for readmission. We performed univariate and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: We identified 6,026 index trauma admissions, with 158 (2.6%) unplanned readmissions within 30 days of discharge. The most common reasons for readmission were disease/symptom progression (30.2%), wound complications (28.9%), and pain control (11.8%). On multivariate analysis, only Injury Severity Score (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.05; p=0.016), penetrating injuries (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.12-3.24; p=0.018), and smoking (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.05-2.86; p=0.031) were found to be significant. Hospital length of stay, insurance status, and race were not significant. CONCLUSION: In a resource-limited environment, we expected a lack of access to care would lead to increased trauma readmissions; however, we were still able to achieve similar readmission rates, irrespective of insurance status and race. Our trauma readmission rate is low and consistent with previously published studies. Our results at our Level I trauma center support previously published studies that found Injury Severity Score and penetrating injury to be risk factors for readmission; however, more ubiquitous risk factors, such as hospital length of stay and discharge destination, were not significant. With no consensus on the risk factors for unplanned early trauma readmission, individual trauma centers should evaluate their specific risk factors for readmission to improve patient outcomes and decrease hospital costs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management, level IV; Epidemiologic, level IV.