Outcomes Associated With Aortic Balloon Occlusion Time in Patients With Zone 1 Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta.

INTRODUCTION: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has the potential to cause clinically relevant systemic ischemic burden with long durations of aortic occlusion (AO). We aimed to examine the association between balloon occlusion time and clinical complications and mortality outcomes in patients undergoing zone 1 REBOA. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acuteregistry patients with Zone 1 REBOA between 2013 and 2022 was performed. Patients with cardiopulmonary resuscitation on arrival or who did not survive past the emergency department were excluded. Total AO times were categorized as follows: <15 min, 15-30 min, 31-60 min, and >60 min. Clinical and procedural variables and in-hospital outcomes were compared across groups using bivariate and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: There were 327 cases meeting inclusion criteria (n = 51 < 15 min, 83 15-30 min, 98 31-60 min, and 95 > 60 min, respectively). AO >60 min had higher admission lactate (8 ± 6; P = 0.004) compared to all other time groups, but injury severity score, heart rate, and systolic blood pressure were similar. Group average times from admission to definitive hemorrhage control ranged from 82 to 103 min and were similar across groups (85 min in AO >60 group). Longer AO times were associated with greater red blood cell, fresh frozen plasma transfusions (P < 0.001), and vasopressor use (P = 0.001). Mortality was greatest in the >60 min group (73%) versus the <15 min, 15-30 min, and 31-60 min groups (53%, 43%, and 45%, P < 0.001). With adjustment for injury severity score, systolic blood pressure, and lactate, AO >60 min had greater mortality (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6-9.4; P < 0.001) than other AO duration groups. Among 153 survivors, AO >60 min had a higher rate of multiple organ failure (15.4%) compared to the other AO durations (0%, 0%, and 4%, P = 0.02). There were no differences in amputation rates (0.7%) or spinal cord ischemia (1.4%). acute kidney injury was seen in 41% of >60 min versus 21%, 27%, and 33%, P = 0.42. CONCLUSIONS: Though greater preocclusion physiologic injury may have been present, REBOA-induced ischemic insult was correlated with poor patient outcomes, specifically, REBOA inflation time >60 min had higher rates of mortality and multiple organ failure. Minimizing AO duration should be prioritized, and AO should not delay achieving definitive hemostasis. Partial REBOA may be a solution to extend safe AO time and deserves further study.

Arterial Access Complications Following Percutaneous Femoral Access in 24-Hour Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta Survivors.

INTRODUCTION: With the use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) comes the potential for vascular access site complications (VASCs) and limb ischemic sequelae. We aimed to determine the prevalence of VASC and associated clinical and technical factors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of 24-h survivors undergoing percutaneous REBOA via the femoral artery in the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute care surgery registry between Oct 2013 and Sep 2021 was performed. The primary outcome was VASC, defined as at least one of the following: hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, arterial stenosis, or the use of patch angioplasty for arterial closure. Associated clinical and procedural variables were examined. Data were analyzed using Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney-U tests, and linear regression. RESULTS: There were 34 (7%) cases with VASC among 485 meeting inclusion criteria. Hematoma (40%) was the most common, followed by pseudoaneurysm (26%) and patch angioplasty (21%). No differences in demographics or injury/shock severity were noted between cases with and without VASC. The use of ultrasound (US) was protective (VASC, 35% versus no VASC, 51%; P = 0.05). The VASC rate in US cases was 12/242 (5%) versus 22/240 (9.2%) without US. Arterial sheath size >7 Fr was not associated with VASC. US use increased over time (R2 = 0.94, P < 0.001) with a stable rate of VASC (R2 = 0.78, P = 0.61). VASC were associated with limb ischemia (VASC, 15% versus no VASC, 4%; P = 0.006) and arterial bypass procedures (VASC 3% versus no VASC 0%; P < 0.001) but amputation was uncommon (VASC, 3% versus no VASC, 0.4%; P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous femoral REBOA had a 7% VASC rate which was stable over time. VASC are associated with limb ischemia but need for surgical intervention and/or amputation is rare. The use of US-guided access appears to be protective against VASC and is recommended for use in all percutaneous femoral REBOA procedures.

Damage control surgery: old concepts and new indications.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: While the principles of damage control surgery - rapid hemorrhage and contamination control with correction of physiologic derangements followed by delayed definitive reconstruction - have remained consistent, forms of damage control intervention have evolved and proliferated dramatically. This review aims to provide a historic perspective of the early trends of damage control surgery as well as an updated understanding of its current state and future trends. RECENT FINDINGS: Physiologically depleted patients in shock due to both traumatic and nontraumatic causes are often treated with damage control laparotomy and surgical principles. Damage control surgery has also been shown to be safe and effective in thoracic and orthopedic injuries. Damage control resuscitation is used in conjunction with surgical source control to restore patient physiology and prevent further collapse. The overuse of damage control laparotomy, however, is associated with increased morbidity and complications. With advancing technology, catheter- and stent-based endovascular modalities are playing a larger role in the resuscitation and definitive care of patients. SUMMARY: Optimal outcome in the care of the most severely injured patients requires judicious use of damage control surgery supplemented by advancements in resuscitation and surgical adjuncts.

Functional recovery in a cohort of ECMO and non-ECMO acute respiratory distress syndrome survivors.

BACKGROUND: The mortality benefit of VV-ECMO in ARDS has been extensively studied, but the impact on long-term functional outcomes of survivors is poorly defined. We aimed to assess the association between ECMO and functional outcomes in a contemporaneous cohort of survivors of ARDS. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective cohort study of ARDS survivors who presented to follow-up clinic. The primary outcome was FVC% predicted. Univariate and multivariate regression models were used to evaluate the impact of ECMO on the primary outcome. RESULTS: This study enrolled 110 survivors of ARDS, 34 of whom were managed using ECMO. The ECMO cohort was younger (35 [28, 50] vs. 51 [44, 61] years old, p < 0.01), less likely to have COVID-19 (58% vs. 96%, p < 0.01), more severely ill based on the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (7 [5, 9] vs. 4 [3, 6], p < 0.01), dynamic lung compliance (15 mL/cmH20 [11, 20] vs. 27 mL/cmH20 [23, 35], p < 0.01), oxygenation index (26 [22, 33] vs. 9 [6, 11], p < 0.01), and their need for rescue modes of ventilation. ECMO patients had significantly longer lengths of hospitalization (46 [27, 62] vs. 16 [12, 31] days, p < 0.01) ICU stay (29 [19, 43] vs. 10 [5, 17] days, p < 0.01), and duration of mechanical ventilation (24 [14, 42] vs. 10 [7, 17] days, p < 0.01). Functional outcomes were similar in ECMO and non-ECMO patients. ECMO did not predict changes in lung function when adjusting for age, SOFA, COVID-19 status, or length of hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in the FVC% predicted, or other markers of pulmonary, neurocognitive, or psychiatric functional recovery outcomes, when comparing a contemporaneous clinic-based cohort of survivors of ARDS managed with ECMO to those without ECMO.

Gestalt clinical severity score (GCSS) as a predictor of patient severity of illness or injury.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if clinical judgement is accurate to predict the severity of injury or illness, and can be used at patient arrival when other formal scoring systems are not yet available. DESIGN: A multicenter pilot study using a prospective observational convenience sample of patients arriving by EMS to the emergency department (ED) or Trauma Center. SETTING: Two urban, Level 1 trauma centers at academic tertiary care hospitals. PATIENTS: Medical and trauma patients age 18 and older transported by EMS (N = 216). Exclusion criteria (prior to arrival): intubation, assisted ventilation (BVM or NPPV), CPR in progress, prisoners, or previously present motor or speech deficits. MEASUREMENTS: Completion of a novel 15-point scale of Verbal, Motor, and Facial Expression within 1-2 min of arrival by a clinician outside of the treatment team. Primary endpoint was the immediate disposition from the ED or Trauma Center: Home, Brief Observation (<24 h), Admission to Floor, ICU (OR and IR as surrogates since these patients ultimately go to the ICU), or Morgue. RESULTS: Univariate analysis revealed a strong, positive monotonic correlation between GCSS and disposition (Rho = 0.693, p < .0001). Multivariable logistic regression revealed the "best" model included GCSS and age (group 18-44 years old versus all the other age groups) (p < .0001). There was a 156% increase in the odds of being discharged home (versus being admitted) for a one-unit increase in GCSS (OR = 2.56, 95% CI 1.94, 3.37). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians can make accurate predictions of severity of injury and illness using a gestalt method and the scoring system we have developed as patient disposition correlates well with GCSS score. GCSS is most accurate with the 18-44 age group.

Contemporary management and time to revascularization in upper extremity arterial injury.

INTRODUCTION: Upper extremity arterial injury is associated with significant morbidity and mortality for trauma patients, but there is a paucity of data to guide the clinician in the management of these injuries. The goals of this review were to characterize the demographics, presentation, clinical management, and outcomes, and to evaluate how time to intervention associates with outcomes in trauma patients with upper extremity vascular injuries. METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) Research Data Set for the years 2007-2016 was queried in order to identify adult patients (age ≥ 18) with an upper extremity arterial injury. Patients with brachiocephalic, subclavian, axillary, or brachial artery injury using the 1998 and 2005 versions of the Abbreviated Injury Scale were included. Patients with non-survivable injuries to the brain, traumatic amputation, or other major arterial injuries to the torso or lower extremities were excluded. RESULTS: The data from 7908 patients with upper extremity arterial injuries was reviewed. Of those, 5407 (68.4%) underwent repair of the injured artery. The median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 10 (IQR = 7-18), and 7.7% of patients had a severe ISS (≥ 25). Median time to repair was 120 min (IQR = 60-240 min). Management was open repair in 52.3%, endovascular repair in 7.3%, and combined open and endovascular repairs in 8.8%; amputation occurred in 1.8% and non-operative management was used in 31.6% of patients. Blunt mechanism of injury, crush injury, concomitant fractures/dislocations, and nerve injuries were associated with amputation, whereas simultaneous venous injury was not. There was a significant decrease in the rate of amputation when patients undergoing surgical revascularization did so within 90 min of injury (P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Injuries to arteries of the upper extremity are managed with open repair, endovascular repair, and, rarely, amputation. Expeditious transport to the operating room for revascularization is the key for limb salvage.

Implementation of an Outpatient Violence Intervention Program to Increase Service Uptake.

Challenges in participant recruitment and retention limit the effectiveness of hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs). This study aimed to determine if an outpatient violence intervention program (VIP) could be integrated into a trauma clinic and increase uptake of violence prevention services. Patients previously hospitalized for intent-to-harm being seen for outpatient follow-up were eligible. VIP counselors met with participants during their clinic visit, administered the survey, and offered violence prevention services (April to June 2019). Patients were followed for 6 months to assess involvement. The primary outcome of interest was long-term participation in the VIP, defined as uptake of services at 6 months, in comparison to inpatient recruitment. Out of 76 patients, 34 (44.7%) did not appear for their appointment. The remainder (n = 42) were offered participation in the study, of which 32 (76.2%) completed the survey. From the group offered VIP services, 57.1% expressed interest, and 5 (20.8%) ultimately took part yielding an overall participation rate of 11.9% at 6 months. The inpatient recruitment rate in 2019 was 2.4%. An outpatient VIP program can be integrated into a clinic setting but suffers from the same challenges faced by inpatient programs resulting in low rates of long-term participation in services. Although a high proportion of participants reported interest, actual engagement at 6 months was low. Reasons behind low participation in VIP services must be investigated.

COVID-19 outcomes of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory failure vs historical cohort of non-COVID-19 viral infections.

INTRODUCTION: Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has become a support modality for patients with acute respiratory failure refractory to standard therapies. VV ECMO has been increasingly used during the current COVID-19 pandemic for patients with refractory respiratory failure. The object of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of VV ECMO in patients with COVID-19 compared to patients with non-COVID-19 viral infections. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients supported with VV ECMO between 8/2014 and 8/2020 whose etiology of illness was a viral pulmonary infection. The primary outcome of this study was to evaluate in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included length of ECMO course, ventilator duration, hospital length of stay, incidence of adverse events through ECMO course. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were included (35 COVID-19 vs 54 non-COVID-19). Forty (74%) of the non-COVID-19 patients had influenza virus. Prior to cannulation, COVID-19 patients had longer ventilator duration (3 vs 1 day, p = .003), higher PaCO2 (64 vs 53 mmHg, p = .012), and white blood cell count (14 vs 9 ×103/µL, p = .004). Overall in-hospital mortality was 33.7% (n = 30). COVID-19 patients had a higher mortality (49% vs. 24%, p = .017) when compared to non-COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 survivors had longer median time on ECMO than non-COVID-19 survivors (24.4 vs 16.5 days p = .03) but had a similar hospital length of stay (HLOS) (41 vs 48 Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenationdays p = .33). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients supported with VV ECMO have a higher mortality than non-COVID-19 patients. While COVID-19 survivors had significantly longer VV ECMO runs than non-COVID-19 survivors, HLOS was similar. This data add to a growing body of literature supporting the use of ECMO for potentially reversible causes of respiratory failure.

A descriptive evaluation of causes of death in venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has become an important support modality for patients with acute respiratory failure refractory to optimal medical therapy, such as low tidal volume mechanical ventilator support, early paralytic infusion, and early prone positioning. The objective of this cohort study was to investigate the causes and timing of in-hospital mortality in patients on VV ECMO. All patients, excluding trauma and bridge to lung transplant, admitted 8/2014-6/2019 to a specialty ICU for VV ECMO were reviewed. Two hundred twenty-five patients were included. In-hospital mortality was 24.4% (n = 55). Most non-survivors (46/55, 84%) died prior to lung recovery and decannulation from VV ECMO. Most common cause of death (COD) for patients who died on VV ECMO was removal of life sustaining therapy (LST) in setting of multisystem organ failure (MSOF) (n = 24). Nine patients died a median of 9 days [6, 11] after decannulation. Most common COD in these patients was palliative withdrawal of LST due to poor prognosis (n = 3). Non-survivors were older and had worse predictive mortality scores than survivors. We found that death in patients supported with VV ECMO in our study most often occurs prior to decannulation and lung recovery. This study demonstrated that the most common cause of death in patients supported with VV ECMO was removal of LST due MSOF. Acute hemorrhage (systemic or intracranial) was not found to be a common cause of death in our patient population.

Decreased PRESET-Score corresponds with improved survival in COVID-19 veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: The PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy Score (PRESET-Score) predicts mortality while on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome. The aim of our study was to assess the association between PRESET-Score and survival in a large COVID-19 VV ECMO cohort. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from 15 March 2020, to 30 November 2021. Univariable and Multivariable analyses were performed to assess patient survival and score differences. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients were included in our analysis with a mean PRESET-Score of 6.74. Overall survival was 65.71%. The mean PRESET-Score was significantly lower in the survivor group (6.03 vs 8.11, p < 0.001). Patients with a PRESET-Score less than or equal to six had improved survival compared to those with a PRESET-Score greater than or equal to 8 (97.7% vs. 32.5%, p < 0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression, a lower PRESET-Score was also predictive of survival (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.75, 4.63, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that lower PRESET scores are associated with improved survival. The utilization of this validated, quantifiable, and objective scoring system to help identify COVID-19 patients with the greatest potential to benefit from VV-ECMO appears feasible. The incorporation of the PRESET-Score into institutional ECMO candidacy guidelines can help insure and improve access of this limited healthcare resource to all critically ill patients.

Prospective Observational Evaluation of the ER-REBOA Catheter at 6 U.S. Trauma Centers.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the current use of the ER-REBOA catheter and associated outcomes and complications. INTRODUCTION: Noncompressible truncal hemorrhage is the leading cause of potentially preventable death in trauma patients. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a novel strategy to obtain earlier temporary hemorrhage control, supporting cardiac, and cerebral perfusion before definitive hemostasis. METHODS: Prospective, observational study conducted at 6 Level 1 Trauma Centers over 12-months. Inclusion criteria were age >15 years of age with evidence of truncal hemorrhage below the diaphragm and decision for emergent hemorrhage control intervention within 60 minutes of arrival. REBOA details, demographics, mechanism of injury, complications, and outcomes were collected. RESULTS: A total of 8166 patients were screened for enrollment. In 75, REBOA was utilized for temporary hemorrhage control. Blunt injury occurred in 80% with a median injury severity score (ISS) 34 (21, 43). Forty-seven REBOAs were placed in Zone 1 and 28 in Zone 3. REBOA inflation increased systolic blood pressure from 67 (40, 83) mm Hg to 108 (90, 128) mm Hg 5 minutes after inflation (P = 0.02). Cardiopulmonary resuscitation was ongoing during REBOA insertion in 17 patients (26.6%) and 10 patients (58.8%) had return of spontaneous circulation after REBOA inflation. The procedural complication rate was 6.6%. Overall mortality was 52%. CONCLUSION: REBOA can be used in blunt and penetrating trauma patients, including those in arrest. Balloon inflation uniformly improved hemodynamics and was associated with a 59% rate of return of spontaneous circulation for patients in arrest. Use of the ER-REBOA catheter is technically safe with a low procedural complication rate.

Characterizing Brain Perfusion in a Swine Model of Raised Intracranial Pressure.

INTRODUCTION: Perfusion of the brain is critical, but this can be compromised due to focal space occupying lesions (SOL). SOLs can raise intracranial pressure (ICP), resulting in reduced cerebral blood flow (CBF). Most gyrencephalic models of brain injury focus on parenchymal injury, with few models of acutely elevated ICP. We hypothesized that we could employ a SOL technique to develop a titratable ICP model and sought to quantitate the resulting decrease in brain perfusion. METHODS: Six swine were anesthetized and instrumented. A Fogarty balloon catheter was inserted intracranially. Blood CO2 partial pressure was maintained between 35 and 45 mmHg. The Fogarty balloon was infused with normal saline at 1 mL/min to ICP targets of 10, 20, 30, and 40 mmHg. CBF (mL/100 g/min) were assessed at each ICP level using computed tomography perfusion (CTP). Data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation with all pressures measured in mmHg. CBF values were compared between baseline and each ICP level using analysis of variance. RESULTS: Baseline ICP was 5 ± 2 and systolic blood pressure was 106 ± 7. Balloon volumes (mL) required to achieve each incremental ICP level were 2.4 ± 0.5, 4.9 ± 1.7, 7.6 ± 1.6, and 9.9 ± 1.7. CBF decreased with each raised ICP level, with CBF being significantly less than baseline at ICP values of 30 (56.1 ± 34.7 versus 20.6 ± 11.0, P < 0.05) and 40 (56.1 ± 34.7 versus 6.5 ± 10.6, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: An intracranial balloon catheter can be used to increase ICP, delivering a proportionate reduction in CBF. This model can be used in the future studies to examine adjuncts that manipulate intracranial pressure and their effect on brain perfusion.

The Role of Endovascular Repair of Popliteal Arterial Injuries in the Acute Setting.

BACKGROUND: The role of endovascular surgery in the treatment of popliteal arterial injuries is not well established. As with other popliteal pathology, open repair has traditionally been considered the gold standard. As data has accumulated and technology advanced, however, a reassessment of the role of endovascular surgery is warranted. The aim of this study is to perform a noninferiority comparison of open versus endovascular management of traumatic popliteal injuries. Our hypothesis is that endovascular management is noninferior to open management of traumatic popliteal injuries. METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank was searched for adult patients from 2002-2016 for isolated popliteal arterial injury. The study used a standard noninferiority methodology to compare rates of amputation and compartment syndrome between endovascular and open surgery. Margins for noninferiority were established using established published rates of complications: 17.1% for amputations and 23.0% for compartment syndrome. Endovascular intervention would be considered noninferior to open surgery if the lower bound confidence of the complication proportion (endo/open complication rate) was greater than the predefined noninferiority margin. RESULTS: A total of 3,698 patients met inclusion criteria, with blunt injury accounting for 2,117 (57%) and penetrating injury accounting for 1,581 (43%). Within the blunt group, 1,976 (93.3%) underwent open and 141 (6.7%) endovascular surgery. The rate of compartment syndrome (percentage and 95% confidence interval) after surgery for open repair was 9.9 (8.6-11.2) and 6.4 (3.2-11.3) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 64.6 (59.7-69.5). The rate of amputation for open repair was 15.7 (14.2-17.4) and 14.2 (9.2-20.6) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 90.4 (87.4-93.4). Within the penetrating group, 1,525 (96.5%) underwent open repair and 56 (3.5%) endovascular surgery. The rate of compartment syndrome after surgery for open repair was 14.9 (13.2-16.7) and 5.4 (1.5-13.6) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 36.2 (31.3-41.1). The rate of amputation for open repair was 4.3 (3.3-5.4) and 3.6 (0.7-11.0) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 83.7 (75.3-90.6). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggests that endovascular repair of popliteal artery injury may be noninferior to open repair with respect to limb preservation. Further examination of endovascular repair in popliteal artery injury is warranted.

Repair of the Iliac Arterial Injury in Trauma: An Endovascular Operation?

BACKGROUND: Endovascular therapy is effective for non-traumatic iliac arterial diseases. The role of endovascular surgery in traumatic iliac lesions is unclear. The aim of this study is to compare outcomes for open versus endovascular management of traumatic iliac injuries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank was searched for patients from 2002to 2016 with iliac arterial injury. Patients were sorted by treatment modality (open versus endo) and mechanism (blunt versus penetrating) and matched using mangled extremity score variables. The proportion of patients undergoing amputation were compared using the chi-square test. RESULTS: In the blunt group, 1550 (82%) had endovascular and 342 (18%) had open repair. Endovascular repair was associated with a significantly lower amputation rate than open repair (0.6% versus 3.6%, P = 0.015) despite higher incidence of concomitant injuries. Venous injury was more frequent in the open group (13.7% versus 1.8%, P < 0.001). Within the penetrating group, 209 (22%) had endovascular and 755 (78%) had open repair. Again endovascular repair was associated with a lower amputation rate (0% versus 5.1%, P = 0.004). Patients undergoing endovascular repair had more severe extremity/orthopedic injury, with venous injury again associated with open repair (48.5% versus 37.4%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair of iliac injuries was associated with a significantly lower rate of amputation than open surgery. Endovascular repair was associated with a higher incidence of several injuries, although open repair was associated with concomitant venous injury. Further work is required to delineate the benefit of endovascular intervention and role of venous injury in limb salvage.

Integrating Endovascular and Operative Intervention in Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of utilization of the hybrid operating room (hybrid-OR) in trauma have not been described. The aim of this study was to describe the sequencing and integration of endovascular and operative interventions in trauma using a hybrid-OR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study of trauma patients who underwent both endovascular and operative intervention (2013-2019). Patients were separated into four groups based on procedure patterns: concomitant-linked (C-L), concomitant-independent, serial-linked (S-L) and serial-independent (S-I). The groups were defined as follows: C-L - related endovascular and operative interventions in the same OR; concomitant-independent - unrelated interventions in the same OR; S-L - related interventions in separate ORs; S-I - unrelated interventions in separate ORs. Patient characteristics, procedures performed and time to angiography in each group were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of 202 patients, most procedures utilizing the hybrid-OR were for hemorrhage control (84.1%) and were performed in a C-L manner (36.1%). Patients in the C-L group were most likely to undergo lower extremity revascularization and received the most transfusions. Patients in the S-L and S-I groups were more severely injured, had greater severe abdominal injury and were more likely to undergo damage control surgery and solid organ interventions, respectively. The C-L group had the highest percentage of patients to undergo angiography within 12 h (77%, P = 0.053). CONCLUSION: The hybrid-OR is an ideal space for hemorrhage control in trauma, but there is room for improvement in the triage of patients with non-compressible torso hemorrhage. Current practice patterns prioritize the hybrid-OR for management of lower extremity injury and are not optimal. Use of the hybrid-OR could be improved by concomitant management of patients with severe abdominal injury requiring damage control surgery.

Do It to Them, Not to Me: Doctors' and Nurses' Personal Preferences Versus Recommendations for End-of-Life Care.

BACKGROUND: The emotional toll and financial cost of end-of-life care can be high. Existing literature suggests that medical providers often choose to forego many aggressive interventions and life-prolonging therapies for themselves. To further investigate this phenomenon, we compared how providers make medical decisions for themselves versus for relatives and unrelated patients. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2019, anonymous surveys were emailed to physicians (attendings, fellows, and residents), nurse practitioners, physician assistances, and nurses at two multifacility tertiary medical centers. Participants were asked to decide how likely they would offer a tracheostomy and feeding gastrostomy to a hypothetical patient with a devastating neurological injury and an uncertain prognosis. Participants were then asked to reconsider their decision if the patient was their own family member or if they themselves were the patient. The Kruskal-Wallis H, Mann-Whitney U, and Tukey tests were used to compare quantitative data. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: Seven hundred seventy-three surveys were completed with a 10% response rate at both institutions. Regardless of professional identity, age, or gender, providers were significantly more likely to recommend a tracheostomy and feeding gastrostomy to an unrelated patient than for themselves. Professional identity and age of the respondent did influence recommendations made to a family member. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that medical practitioners make different end-of-life care decisions for themselves compared with others. It is worth investigating further why there is such a discrepancy between what medical providers choose for themselves compared with what they recommend for others.

The Bitter and the Sweet: Relationship of Lactate, Glucose, and Mortality After Severe Blunt Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Hyperglycemia is associated with mortality after trauma; however, few studies have simultaneously investigated the association of depth of shock and acute hyperglycemia. We evaluated lactate, as a surrogate measure for depth of shock, and glucose levels on mortality following severe blunt trauma. We hypothesize that measurements of both lactate and glucose are associated with mortality when considered simultaneously. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study at a single academic trauma center. Inclusion criteria are age 18-89 years, blunt trauma, injury severity score (ISS) ≥15, and transferred from the scene of injury. All serum blood glucose and lactate values were analyzed within the first 24 hours of admission. Multiple metrics of glucose and lactate were calculated: first glucose (Glucadm) and lactate (Lacadm) at hospital admission, mean 24-hour after hospital admission glucose (Gluc24-hMean) and lactate (Lac24-hMean), maximum 24-hour after hospital admission glucose (Gluc24-hMax) and lactate (Lac24-hMax), and time-weighted 24-hour after hospital admission glucose (Gluc24-hTW) and lactate (Lac24-hTW). Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Multivariable logistic regression modeling assessed the odds ratio (OR) of mortality, after adjusting for confounding variables. RESULTS: A total of 1439 trauma patients were included. When metrics of both glucose and lactate were analyzed, after adjusting for age, ISS, and admission shock index, only lactate remained significantly associated with mortality: Lacadm (OR, 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.44); Lac24-hMean (OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.52-2.28); Lac24-hMax (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.23-1.56); and Lac24-hTW (OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.53-2.26). CONCLUSIONS: Lactate is associated with mortality in severely injured blunt trauma patients, after adjusting for injury severity, age, and shock index. However, we did not find evidence for an association of glucose with mortality after adjusting for lactate.

Aspirin Use Is Associated With Decreased Mechanical Ventilation, Intensive Care Unit Admission, and In-Hospital Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is associated with hypercoagulability and increased thrombotic risk in critically ill patients. To our knowledge, no studies have evaluated whether aspirin use is associated with reduced risk of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality. METHODS: A retrospective, observational cohort study of adult patients admitted with COVID-19 to multiple hospitals in the United States between March 2020 and July 2020 was performed. The primary outcome was the need for mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were ICU admission and in-hospital mortality. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for study outcomes were calculated using Cox-proportional hazards models after adjustment for the effects of demographics and comorbid conditions. RESULTS: Four hundred twelve patients were included in the study. Three hundred fourteen patients (76.3%) did not receive aspirin, while 98 patients (23.7%) received aspirin within 24 hours of admission or 7 days before admission. Aspirin use had a crude association with less mechanical ventilation (35.7% aspirin versus 48.4% nonaspirin, P = .03) and ICU admission (38.8% aspirin versus 51.0% nonaspirin, P = .04), but no crude association with in-hospital mortality (26.5% aspirin versus 23.2% nonaspirin, P = .51). After adjusting for 8 confounding variables, aspirin use was independently associated with decreased risk of mechanical ventilation (adjusted HR, 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.85, P = .007), ICU admission (adjusted HR, 0.57, 95% CI, 0.38-0.85, P = .005), and in-hospital mortality (adjusted HR, 0.53, 95% CI, 0.31-0.90, P = .02). There were no differences in major bleeding (P = .69) or overt thrombosis (P = .82) between aspirin users and nonaspirin users. CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin use may be associated with improved outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, a sufficiently powered randomized controlled trial is needed to assess whether a causal relationship exists between aspirin use and reduced lung injury and mortality in COVID-19 patients.

Intoxication and overdose should not preclude veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: Acute intoxication (AI) related morbidity and mortality are increasing in the United States. For patients with severe respiratory failure in the setting of an acute ingestion, veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) can provide salvage therapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes in patients with overdose-related need for VV ECMO. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all patients admitted to a specialty VV ECMO unit between August 2014 and August 2018. Patients were stratified by those whose indication for VV ECMO was directly related to an acute ingestion (alcohol, illicit drug, or prescription drug overdose) and those with unrelated diagnoses. Demographics, pre-cannulation clinical characteristics, ECMO parameters, and outcomes data was collected and analyzed with parametric and non-parametric statistics as indicated. RESULTS: 189 patients were enrolled with 27 (14%) diagnosed with AI. Patients requiring VV ECMO for an AI were younger, had lower median BMI and PaO2/FiO2, and higher RESP scores than non-AI patients (p = 0.002, 0.01, 0.03 and 0.01). There was no difference in pre-cannulation pH, lactate, or SOFA scores between the two groups (p = 0.24, 0.5, 0.6). There was no difference in survival to discharge (p = 0.95). Among survivors, there was no difference in ECMO time or hospital stay (p = 0.24, 0.07). CONCLUSION: We demonstrate no survival difference for patients with and without an AI-related need for VV ECMO. AI patients should be supported with VV ECMO when traditional therapies fail despite potential stigma against acceptance on referral.

Safety and efficacy of radial access in trauma in 65 trauma endovascular cases.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular techniques in trauma surgery are becoming increasingly important in patient management, with procedures such as pelvic and splenic angioembolization becoming the standard of care for certain injuries. Traditionally, such interventions are performed via femoral access, although the morbidity of this approach is not insignificant (3%-10%). Transradial access (TRA) is an attractive alternative, pioneered by cardiologists, with low rates of access site complications in patients undergoing coronary intervention. Recently, this technology has extended to other interventions. The aim of this study was to present the initial experience of a radial program in a busy trauma center, with specific regard to safety and complications. METHODS: The medical records of trauma patients undergoing endovascular procedures via TRA between March 2018 and December 2018 were queried for procedural and postoperative data. Demography and injury characteristics were presented for the overall cohort, followed by a comparison of procedural data and complications between laterality. Continuous variables were compared using a two-tailed t-test and categorical variables were compared using a χ2 test. RESULTS: Over a 9-month period, 65 patients underwent 81 interventions via TRA, most commonly solid organ or pelvic angiography/embolization. Radial artery access was achieved in all patients, with procedural success achieved in all but two patients (n = 63 [96.9%]) who had hypoplastic radial artery anatomy, who underwent ulnar access. The overall technique-related complication rate was 1.5% with no difference observed between laterality (n = 1; P = .523). One patient with an admission Glasgow Coma Score of 3 and coagulopathy developed radial artery thrombosis after pelvic angiography via right TRA. Mortality was seen in seven patients (10.8%) owing to hemorrhagic shock (n = 3 [42.8%]) or multiorgan failure (n = 4 [57.1%]). There were no cases of postprocedural access site bleeding, hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, vascular injury, intraoperative arrhythmia or cerebrovascular accident, arteriovenous fistula formation, or infection. CONCLUSIONS: TRA is a feasible and low-risk alternative for endovascular intervention in the trauma patient. It yields good technical success with low morbidity. Although larger studies are needed to establish the full efficacy of TRA at the multi-institutional level, this single-institution study demonstrates the legitimacy of an alternative means for endovascular intervention in the trauma patient.