Outcomes of Protocol-Driven Venous Thromboembolic Chemo-Prophylaxis in Trauma Patients: A Trauma Quality Improvement Project Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is the standard for venous thromboembolic (VTE) chemo-prophylaxis in trauma patients; however, inconsistencies in the use of LMWH exist. The objective of this study was to assess VTE outcomes in response to a chemo-prophylaxis protocol guided by patient physiology (eg, creatinine clearance) and comorbidities. METHODS: ACS TQIP Benchmark Reports at a level 1 trauma center using a patient physiology and comorbidity directed VTE chemo-prophylaxis protocol were analyzed for Spring 2019 to Fall 2021. Patient demographics, VTE rates and pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis type were collected for "All Patients" and "Elderly" (TQIP: age ≥ 55 years) cohorts. RESULTS: Data was analyzed for 1919183 "All Hospitals" (AH) and 5843 patients single institution (SI) using the physiologic and comorbidity guided VTE chemo-prophylaxis protocol. Elderly subgroup had 701965 (AH) and 2939 (SI) patients. Use of non-LMWH chemo-prophylaxis was significantly higher at SI: All patients = 62.6% SI vs 22.1% (P < .01); Elderly = 68.8% SI vs 28.1% AH (P < .01). VTE, DVT, and PE rates for All Patients and Elderly subgroup were significantly reduced at SI, except Elderly PE which was statistically equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: Protocol-driven VTE chemo-prophylaxis was associated with significantly lower LMWH use accompanied by significant reductions in All VTE, DVT, PE, and Elderly VTE and DVT with no difference in Elderly PE rates. These results may imply that adherence to a physiologic and comorbidity directed chemo-prophylaxis protocol, rather than LMWH, reduces VTE events in trauma patients. Further investigation to elucidate best practice is warranted.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta and resuscitative thoracotomy are associated with similar outcomes in traumatic cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a minimally invasive alternative to resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) for patients with hemorrhagic shock. However, the potential benefits of this approach remain subject of debate. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of REBOA and RT for traumatic cardiac arrest. METHODS: A planned secondary analysis of the United States Department of Defense-funded Emergent Truncal Hemorrhage Control study was performed. Between 2017 and 2018, a prospective observational study of noncompressible torso hemorrhage was conducted at six Level I trauma centers. Patients were dichotomized by REBOA or RT, and baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 454 patients were enrolled in the primary study, of which 72 patients were included in the secondary analysis (26 underwent REBOA and 46 underwent resuscitative thoracotomy). Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta patients were older, had a greater body mass index, and were less likely to be the victims of penetrating trauma. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta patients also had less severe abdominal injuries and more severe extremity injuries, although the overall injury severity scores were similar. There was no difference in mortality between groups (88% vs. 93%, p = 0.767). However, time to aortic occlusion was longer in REBOA patients (7 vs. 4 minutes, p = 0.001) and they required more transfusions of red blood cells (4.5 vs. 2.5 units, p = 0.007) and plasma (3 vs. 1 unit, p = 0.032) in the emergency department. After adjusted analysis, mortality remained similar between groups (RR, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.12, p = 0.304). CONCLUSION: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta and RT were associated with similar survival after traumatic cardiac arrest, although time to successful aortic occlusion was longer in the REBOA group. Further research is needed to better define the role of REBOA in trauma. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Rectal Contrast CT Scans of Limited Utility in Diagnosing Colonic Injuries in Penetrating Trauma: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Using rectal contrast computed tomography (CT) to identify traumatic colorectal injuries has become commonplace; however, these injuries remain relatively infrequent findings on CTs obtained for penetrating back and flank trauma. We conducted a meta-analysis to ascertain the efficacy of rectal contrast CT in identifying such injuries in victims penetrating injuries. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were queried for relevant articles between 1974 and 2022. Review articles, case studies, and non-English manuscripts were excluded. Studies without descriptive CT and operative findings were excluded. Positive scans refer to rectal contrast extravasation. Sensitivity and specificity of rectal contrast CT scans were calculated with aggregated CT findings that were cross-referenced with laparotomy findings. RESULTS: Only 8 manuscripts representing 506 patients quantified colorectal injuries and specified patients with rectal contrast extravasation. Seven patients with true colorectal injuries had no contrast extravasation on CT. There was one true positive scan. Another scan identified contrast extravasation, but laparotomy revealed no colorectal injury. Rectal contrast had sensitivity of 12.5%, specificity 99.8%, positive predictive value (PPV) 50%, negative predictive value (NPV) 99%, and a false negative rate of 88% in identifying colonic injuries. DISCUSSION: The summation of 8 manuscripts suggest that the addition of rectal contrast in identifying colonic and rectal injuries may be of limited utility given its poor sensitivity and may be unnecessary. In its absence, subtle clues such as hematomas, extraluminal air, IV-dye extravasation, and trajectory may be additional indicators of injury. Further investigations are required to demonstrate a true benefit for the addition of rectal contrast.

Severity of traumatic adrenal injury does not meaningfully affect clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: There are limited data comparing the severity of traumatic adrenal injury (TAI) and the need for interventions, such as transfusions, hospitalization, or incidence of adrenal insufficiency (AI) and other clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between the grade of TAI and the need for subsequent intervention and clinical outcomes following the injury. METHODS: After obtaining Institutional Review Board approval, our trauma registry was queried for patients with TAI between 2009 and 2017. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) examinations of the abdomen and pelvis were evaluated by a board-certified radiologist with subspecialty expertise in abdominal and trauma imaging, and adrenal injuries were classified as either low grade (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grade I-III) or high grade (AAST grade IV-V). Patients without initial contrast-enhanced CT imaging and those with indeterminate imaging findings on initial CT were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients with 149 TAI were included. Eight-six patients demonstrated low-grade injuries and 43 high grade. Age, gender, and Injury Severity Score (ISS) were not statistically different between the groups. There was an increased number of major vascular injuries in the low-grade vs. high-grade group (23% vs. 5%, p < 0.01). No patient required transfusions or laparotomy for control of adrenal hemorrhage. There was no statistical difference in hospital length of stay (LOS), ventilator days, or mortality. Low-grade adrenal injuries were, however, associated with shorter ICU LOS (10 days vs. 16 days, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: The need for interventions and clinical outcomes between the low-grade and high-grade groups was similar. These results suggest that, regardless of the TAI grade, treatment should be based on a holistic clinical assessment and less focused on specific interventions directed at addressing the adrenal injury.

Predicting the need for massive transfusion: Prospective validation of a smartphone-based clinical decision support tool.

BACKGROUND: Improper or delayed activation of a massive transfusion protocol may have consequences to individuals and institutions. We designed a complex predictive algorithm that was packaged within a smartphone application. We hypothesized it would accurately assess the need for massive transfusion protocol activation and assist clinicians in that decision. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients at an urban, level I trauma center. The application recorded the surgeon's initial opinion for activation and then prompted inputs for the model. The application provided a prediction and recorded the surgeon's final decision on activation. RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty-one patients were enrolled (83% male; 59% penetrating; median Injury Severity Score 9; mean base deficit -4.11). Of 36 massive transfusion protocol activations, 26 had an app prediction of "high" or "moderate" probability. Of these, 4 (15%) patients received <10 u blood as a result of early hemorrhage control. Two hundred and eighty-five patients did not have massive transfusion protocol activated by the surgeon with 27 (9%) patients having "moderate" or "high" likelihood predicted by the application. Twenty-four of these did not require massive transfusion, and all patients had acidosis that unrelated to hemorrhagic shock. For 13 (50%) of the patients with "high" probability, the surgeon correctly altered their initial decision based on this information. The algorithm demonstrated an adjusted accuracy of 0.96 (95% confidence interval [0.93-0.98); P ≤ .001]), sensitivity = 0.99, specificity 0.72, positive predictive value 0.96, negative predictive value 0.99, and area under the receiver operating curve = 0.86. CONCLUSION: A smartphone-based clinical decision tools can aid surgeons in the decision to active massive transfusion protocol in real time, although it does not completely replace clinician judgment.

A multicenter trial of current trends in the diagnosis and management of high-grade pancreatic injuries.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes following pancreatic trauma have not improved significantly over the past two decades. A 2013 Western Trauma Association algorithm highlighted emerging data that might improve the diagnosis and management of high-grade pancreatic injuries (HGPIs; grades III-V). We hypothesized that the use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, pancreatic duct stenting, operative drainage versus resection, and nonoperative management of HGPIs increased over time. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective review of diagnosis, management, and outcomes of adult pancreatic injuries from 2010 to 2018 was performed. Data were analyzed by grade and time period (PRE, 2010-2013; POST, 2014-2018) using various statistical tests where appropriate. RESULTS: Thirty-two centers reported data on 515 HGPI patients. A total of 270 (53%) had penetrating trauma, and 58% went directly to the operating room without imaging. Eighty-nine (17%) died within 24 hours. Management and outcomes of 426 24-hour survivors were evaluated. Agreement between computed tomography and operating room grading was 38%. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography use doubled in grade IV/V injuries over time but was still low.Overall HGPI treatment and outcomes did not change over time. Resection was performed in 78% of grade III injuries and remained stable over time, while resection of grade IV/V injuries trended downward (56% to 39%, p = 0.11). Pancreas-related complications (PRCs) occurred more frequently in grade IV/V injuries managed with drainage versus resection (61% vs. 32%, p = 0.0051), but there was no difference in PRCs for grade III injuries between resection and drainage.Pancreatectomy closure had no impact on PRCs. Pancreatic duct stenting increased over time in grade IV/V injuries, with 76% used to treat PRCs. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative and computed tomography grading are different in the majority of HGPI cases. Resection is still used for most patients with grade III injuries; however, drainage may be a noninferior alternative. Drainage trended upward for grade IV/V injuries, but the higher rate of PRCs calls for caution in this practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective diagnostic/therapeutic study, level III.

Determination of optimal deployment strategy for REBOA in patients with non-compressible hemorrhage below the diaphragm.

BACKGROUND: Non-compressible truncal hemorrhage (NCTH) is the leading cause of preventable death after trauma. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) achieves temporary hemorrhage control, supporting cardiac and cerebral perfusion prior to definitive hemostasis. Aortic zone selection algorithms vary among institutions. We evaluated the efficacy of an algorithm for REBOA use. METHODS: A multicenter prospective, observational study conducted at six level 1 trauma centers over 12 months. Inclusion criteria were age >15 years with evidence of infradiaphragmatic NCTH needing emergent hemorrhage control within 60 min of ED arrival. An algorithm characterized by the results of focused assessment with sonography in trauma and pelvic X-ray was assessed post hoc for efficacy in a cohort of patients receiving REBOA. RESULTS: Of the 8166 patients screened, 78 patients had a REBOA placed. 21 patients were excluded, leaving 57 patients for analysis. The algorithm ensures REBOA deployment proximal to hemorrhage source to control bleeding in 98.2% of cases and accurately predicts the optimal REBOA zone in 78.9% of cases. If the algorithm was violated, bleeding was optimally controlled in only 43.8% (p=0.01). Three (75.0%) of the patients that received an inappropriate zone 1 REBOA died, two from multiple organ failure (MOF). All three patients that died with an inappropriate zone 3 REBOA died from exsanguination. DISCUSSION: This algorithm ensures proximal hemorrhage control and accurately predicts the primary source of hemorrhage. We propose a new algorithm that will be more inclusive. A zone 3 REBOA should not be performed when a zone 1 is indicated by the algorithm as 100% of these patients exsanguinated. MOF, perhaps from visceral ischemia in patients with an inappropriate zone 1 REBOA, may have been prevented with zone 3 placement or limited zone 1 occlusion time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Management of Minor Traumatic Brain Injury in an ED Observation Unit.

INTRODUCTION: Traumatic intracranial hemorrhages (TIH) have traditionally been managed in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting with neurosurgery consultation and repeat head CT (HCT) for each patient. Recent publications indicate patients with small TIH and normal neurological examinations who are not on anticoagulation do not require ICU-level care, repeat HCT, or neurosurgical consultation. It has been suggested that these patients can be safely discharged home after a short period of observation in emergency department observation units (EDOU) provided their symptoms do not progress. METHODS: This study is a retrospective cross-sectional evaluation of an EDOU protocol for minor traumatic brain injury (mTBI). It was conducted at a Level I trauma center. The protocol was developed by emergency medicine, neurosurgery and trauma surgery and modeled after the Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG). All patients were managed by attendings in the ED with discretionary neurosurgery and trauma surgery consultations. Patients were eligible for the mTBI protocol if they met BIG 1 or BIG 2 criteria (no intoxication, no anticoagulation, normal neurological examination, no or non-displaced skull fracture, subdural or intraparenchymal hematoma up to 7 millimeters, trace to localized subarachnoid hemorrhage), and had no other injuries or medical co-morbidities requiring admission. Protocol in the EDOU included routine neurological checks, symptom management, and repeat HCT for progression of symptoms. The EDOU group was compared with historical controls admitted with primary diagnosis of TIH over the 12 months prior to the initiation of the mTBI protocols. Primary outcome was reduction in EDOU length of stay (LOS) as compared to inpatient LOS. Secondary outcomes included rates of neurosurgical consultation, repeat HCT, conversion to inpatient admission, and need for emergent neurosurgical intervention. RESULTS: There were 169 patients placed on the mTBI protocol between September 1, 2016 and August 31, 2019. The control group consisted of 53 inpatients. Median LOS (interquartile range [IQR]) for EDOU patients was 24.8 (IQR: 18.8 - 29.9) hours compared with a median LOS for the comparison group of 60.2 (IQR: 45.1 - 85.0) hours (P < .001). In the EDOU group 47 (27.8%) patients got a repeat HCT compared with 40 (75.5%) inpatients, and 106 (62.7%) had a neurosurgical consultation compared with 53 (100%) inpatients. Subdural hematoma was the most common type of hemorrhage. It was found in 60 (35.5%) patients, and subarachnoid hemorrhage was found in 56 cases (33.1%). Eleven patients had multicompartment hemorrhage of various classifications. Twelve (7.1%) patients required hospital admission from the EDOU. None of the EDOU patients required emergent neurosurgical intervention. CONCLUSION: Patients with minor TIH can be managed in an EDOU using an mTBI protocol and discretionary neurosurgical consults and repeat HCT. This is associated with a significant reduction in length of stay.

Traumatic Blunt Injuries to the Celiac Artery: A 5-Year Review From a Level I Trauma Center.

BACKGROUND: Injury to the celiac artery secondary to a blunt mechanism of trauma is an extremely rare injury that accounts for only 1%-2% of all visceral vascular lesions. Although rare, this injury is associated with significant mortality. Despite this high mortality, there are currently only a few published case series of blunt celiac artery injuries in the literature. This study sought to review all cases of blunt celiac artery injuries that presented to our Level I trauma center over a 5-year period. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of all patients who presented with a traumatic blunt celiac artery injury between January 2012 and March 2017. RESULTS: A total of 10 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study. The majority of patients were male (7/10, 70%), the average age was 38.3 ± 16.1 years, and overall mortality was 20% (2/10). On average, patients spent 10.2 ± 6.5 days in the hospital, 4.4 ± 4.5 days in the ICU, and 1.6 ± 2.0 days on the ventilator. The majority of patients presented with either an intimal dissection (3/10, 30%) or an intraluminal thrombus (3/10, 30%). Other injuries included pseudoaneurysms (2/10, 20%), complete avulsion (1/10, 10%), and an intimal dissection with thrombus (1/10, 10%). Of these injuries, 2 (20%) were noted to have retrograde flow on imaging studies including computed tomography angiography and a visceral angiogram. The majority of patients (8/10, 80%) were managed nonoperatively, and 5 (50%) patients were discharged home on aspirin. One patient who was initially managed nonoperatively required an unplanned return to the operating room for ischemic bowel, liver, and stomach. There were no other complications noted. DISCUSSION: Traumatic blunt injury to the celiac artery is rare. Although there are multiple treatment options, there is currently no consensus in regard to management guidelines. In this case series, the majority of patients were successfully managed nonoperatively suggesting that a selective approach for intervention on patients with a blunt celiac artery injury should be considered.

Same-Admission Cholecystectomy Compared with Delayed Cholecystectomy in Acute Gallstone Pancreatitis: Outcomes and Predictors in a Safety Net Hospital Cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Recent studies have shown a decrease in gallstone-related complications if same-admission cholecystectomy (SAC) is performed in mild gallstone pancreatitis (GSP); however, SAC often is not performed in resource-limited settings such as safety net hospitals. The aims of this study were to evaluate the rate of SAC and compare a composite endpoint of recurrent biliary events in patients undergoing SAC with patients in the delayed cholecystectomy (DC) group. Secondary aims included evaluating the rate of recurrent pancreatitis in patients in the DC group, identifying the predictors for DC and the reasons for not undergoing SAC. METHODS: We reviewed 310 patients admitted in the past 5 years with the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. Eighty patients were admitted for gallstone pancreatitis; 75% were African American, 18% were white, and the average age was 44 years with a mean body mass index of 30. Forty patients did not receive cholecystectomy before discharge. The DC and SAC groups were similar in body mass index, ethnicity, severity of pancreatitis, and complications. RESULTS: The DC group was significantly more likely to be older and with higher comorbidity indexes compared with the SAC group. Bedside Index of Severity in Acute Pancreatitis scores and revised Atlanta classification definitions were used to define severe acute pancreatitis; 10% (4) of patients had organ failure at 48 hours, whereas 17.5% (7) had a Bedside Index of Severity in Acute Pancreatitis scores ≥3. A total of 14 recurrent biliary events occurred in the DC group (14 of 40), which was 35% compared with 2 of 40 (5%) in the SAC group (P < 0.001). Of the 9 patients who developed recurrent pancreatitis, 8 were in the DC group (8 of 40, 20%, P = 0.02). Of the 40 patients in the DC group, only 14 patients eventually received a cholecystectomy documented in our hospital, with median-length postdischarge follow-up of approximately 6.5 months. On regression analysis, a Charlson Comorbidity Index >2 was the only significant predictor of DC. The most common reason for DC was no surgical consultation during the inpatient stay (22%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support existing evidence that DC is associated with a significantly increased risk of recurrent biliary events and pancreatitis. Furthermore, we report a 56% adherence to the current guidelines for SAC and report that the most common reason for not undergoing SAC was the absence of surgical consultation. We conclude that ensuring SAC in eligible patients should be a priority for safety net hospitals because it may help decrease hospital costs in the long term, and active efforts should be made to identify patients who may be less likely to receive SAC.

The effect of hemorrhage control adjuncts on outcome in severe pelvic fracture: A multi-institutional study.

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamically unstable patients with severe pelvic fracture are a significant challenge to trauma surgeons and have high mortality. Significant variability across institutions in hemorrhage control adjuncts used to quell pelvic bleeding has been demonstrated. However, the effect of these methods on time to definitive bleeding control, type of resuscitation given, and outcomes remains unknown. We sought to elucidate those effects. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective review of severe pelvic fracture patients in shock between 2011 and 2016. Shock was defined as systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg, heart rate greater than 120 beats per minute, or base deficit less than -5. Definitive bleeding control was defined as time to surgical control in the operating room or embolization by interventional radiology. Significance level was at p less than 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 279 severe pelvic fracture patients with shock on admission from 12 trauma centers were included. The cohort was primarily male (62%) with median (interquartile range) age of 40 years (28-54 years), Injury Severity Score of 38 (29-50), and Glasgow Coma Scale score of 13 (3-15). Overall mortality was 32%. The most common adjunct used was pelvic binder (50%) followed by no adjunct (30.5%); least common was resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) (2.5%). Preperitoneal packing alone and REBOA alone/with other adjunct(s) resulted in the fastest times to operating room/interventional radiology but also had the highest blood utilization and mortality rates. Resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta was most often used along with pelvic binder (6 of 13; 46%). CONCLUSION: Marked variation in management of severe pelvic fracture patients in shock indicates the need for a standardized approach to maximize outcomes and minimize transfusion requirements. The use of preperitoneal packing and/or REBOA yielded fastest times to definitive bleeding control. However, REBOA continues to be infrequently used. Future prospective analysis of this combination needs further validation in patients with severe pelvic hemorrhage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV.

Time to stroke: A Western Trauma Association multicenter study of blunt cerebrovascular injuries.

BACKGROUND: Screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries (BCVIs) in asymptomatic high-risk patients has become routine. To date, the length of this asymptomatic period has not been defined. Determining the time to stroke could impact therapy including earlier initiation of antithrombotics in multiply injured patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the time to stroke in patients with a BCVI-related stroke. We hypothesized that the majority of patients suffer stroke between 24 hours and 72 hours after injury. METHODS: Patients with a BCVI-related stroke from January 2007 to January 2017 from 37 trauma centers were reviewed. RESULTS: During the 10-year study, 492 patients had a BCVI-related stroke; the majority were men (61%), with a median age of 39 years and ISS of 29. Stroke was present at admission in 182 patients (37%) and occurred during an Interventional Radiology procedure in six patients. In the remaining 304 patients, stroke was identified a median of 48 hours after admission: 53 hours in the 144 patients identified by neurologic symptoms and 42 hours in the 160 patients without a neurologic examination and an incidental stroke identified on imaging. Of those patients with neurologic symptoms, 88 (61%) had a stroke within 72 hours, whereas 56 had a stroke after 72 hours; there was a sequential decline in stroke occurrence over the first week. Of the 304 patients who had a stroke after admission, 64 patients (22%) were being treated with antithrombotics when the stroke occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients suffer BCVI-related stroke in the first 72 hours after injury. Time to stroke can help inform clinicians about initiation of treatment in the multiply injured patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/Epidemiologic, level III.

Occupational exposure during emergency department thoracotomy: A prospective, multi-institution study.

BACKGROUND: Occupational exposure is an important consideration during emergency department thoracotomy (EDT). While human immunodeficiency virus/hepatitis prevalence in trauma patients (0-16.8%) and occupational exposure rates during operative trauma procedures (1.9-18.0%) have been reported, exposure risk during EDT is unknown. We hypothesized that occupational exposure risk during EDT would be greater than other operative trauma procedures. METHODS: A prospective, observational study at 16 US trauma centers was performed (2015-2016). All bedside EDT resuscitation providers were surveyed with a standardized data collection tool and risk factors analyzed with respect to the primary end point, EDT occupational exposure (percutaneous injury, mucous membrane, open wound, or eye splash). Provider and patient variables and outcomes were evaluated with single and multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred sixty participants (23% attending, 59% trainee, 11% nurse, 7% other) were surveyed after 305 EDTs (gunshot wound, 68%; prehospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 57%; emergency department signs of life, 37%), of which 15 patients survived (13 neurologically intact) their hospitalization. Overall, 22 occupational exposures were documented, resulting in an exposure rate of 7.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.7-10.5%) per EDT and 1.6% (95% CI, 1.0-2.4%) per participant. No differences in trauma center level, number of participants, or hours worked were identified. Providers with exposures were primarily trainees (68%) with percutaneous injuries (86%) during the thoracotomy (73%). Full precautions were utilized in only 46% of exposed providers, while multiple variable logistic regression determined that each personal protective equipment item utilized during EDT correlated with a 34% decreased risk of occupational exposure (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.91; p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the risk of occupational exposure should not deter providers from performing EDT. Despite the small risk of viral transmission, our data revealed practices that may place health care providers at unnecessary risk of occupational exposure. Regardless of the lifesaving nature of the procedure, improved universal precaution compliance with personal protective equipment is paramount and would further minimize occupational exposure risks during EDT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management study, level III.