Background Anti-inflammatory effects of tranexamic acid (TXA) in reducing trauma endotheliopathy may protect from acute lung injury. Clinical data showing this benefit in trauma patients is lacking. We hypothesized that TXA administration mitigates pulmonary complications in penetrating trauma patients. Materials and Methods This is a post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults (18+ years) with penetrating torso and/or proximal extremity injury presenting at 25 urban trauma centers. Tranexamic acid administration in the prehospital setting or within three hours of admission was examined. Participants were propensity matched to compare similarly injured patients. The primary outcome was development of pulmonary complication (ARDS and/or pneumonia). Results A total of 2382 patients were included, and 206 (8.6%) received TXA. Of the 206, 93 (45%) received TXA prehospital and 113 (55%) received it within three hours of hospital admission. Age, sex, and incidence of massive transfusion did not differ. The TXA group was more severely injured, more frequently presented in shock (SBP < 90 mmHg), developed more pulmonary complications, and had lower survival ( P < 0.01 for all). After propensity matching, 410 patients remained (205 in each cohort) with no difference in age, sex, or rate of shock. On logistic regression, increased emergency department heart rate was associated with pulmonary complications. Tranexamic acid was not associated with different rate of pulmonary complications or survival on logistic regression. Survival was not different between the groups on logistic regression or propensity score–matched analysis. Conclusions Tranexamic acid administration is not protective against pulmonary complications in penetrating trauma patients.
INTRODUCTION Military experience has demonstrated mortality improvement when advanced resuscitative care (ARC) is provided for trauma patients with severe hemorrhage. The benefits of ARC for trauma in civilian emergency medical services (EMS) systems with short transport intervals are still unknown. We hypothesized that ARC implementation in an urban EMS system would reduce in-hospital mortality. METHODS This was a prospective analysis of ARC bundle administration between 2021 and 2023 in an urban EMS system with 70,000 annual responses. The ARC bundle consisted of calcium, tranexamic acid, and packed red blood cells via a rapid infuser. Advanced resuscitative care patients were compared with trauma registry controls from 2016 to 2019. Included were patients with a penetrating injury and systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg. Excluded were isolated head trauma or prehospital cardiac arrest. In-hospital mortality was the primary outcome of interest. RESULTS A total of 210 patients (ARC, 61; controls, 149) met the criteria. The median age was 32 years, with no difference in demographics, initial systolic blood pressure or heart rate recorded by EMS, or New Injury Severity Score between groups. At hospital arrival, ARC patients had lower median heart rate and shock index than controls ( p ≤ 0.03). Fewer patients in the ARC group required prehospital advanced airway placement ( p < 0.001). Twenty-four-hour and total in-hospital mortality were lower in the ARC group ( p ≤ 0.04). Multivariable regression revealed an independent reduction in in-hospital mortality with ARC (odds ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.05–0.68; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION Early ARC in a fast-paced urban EMS system is achievable and may improve physiologic derangements while decreasing patient mortality. Advanced resuscitative care closer to the point of injury warrants consideration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.
Since ancient times, mythology has included tales of creatures made of an amalgamation of others, transferring body parts and skin. In the 1950s, with no other medical options for then incurable diseases, including nephritis, teams of scientists, surgeons, and generous patients started the field of organ transplant with the first successful kidney transplant in a human. The scientific discoveries and innovations since that first successful transplant in 1954 have turned the mythical concept of transplant into reality. The overall success and public acceptance of organ donation and transplant today is thanks to multidisciplinary teams of basic scientists, immunologists, surgeons, and public advocates. Today, research is propelling the field forward with advancements like face transplants, experiments of lab-grown organs, and much more. In the United States alone, over 800,000 patients have had their lives saved or significantly improved thanks to transplant since national recording began by the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network in 1988.
Background: Here, we investigate the incidence of traumatic injuries during the COVID-19 pandemic over a year-long period which includes the first documented COVID-19 case in the US as well as rollout of vaccines.The study period includes the months of strictest lockdowns which early reports have focused on, as well as reopening.Methods: This retrospective analysis was performed with all records of trauma patients from our level 1 trauma center's trauma registry.Mean weekly and total yearly patient counts from 2017-2019 and 2020 were compared using independent samples t-test or Mann-Whitney U test.Shapiro-Wilk and Levene's tests were used to assess normality and variances, respectively.Results: There were more trauma patients in 2020 than the 2017-2019 average.In 2020, there were significantly higher weekly counts of penetrating injuries vs the 2017-2019 average [mean (SD)] [22.5 (7.2) vs 17.5 (3.1), p < 0.000], specifically gunshot wounds (GSWs) [15.8 (6.0) vs 11.3 (2.7), p < 0.0000] and more assaults [23.3 (6.7) vs 19.4 (3.2), p < 0.0003].In 2020, fewer falls [11.9 (4.3) vs 13.4 (2.6), p < 0.03], pedestrian/bicycle accidents [5.5 (3.1) vs 7.5 (2.1), p < 0.0002], and accidents in general [45.9 (17.1) vs 50.9 (5.6), p < 0.05] presented to our hospital compared to previous years.Overall, weekly totals were higher than average in 2020, but were lower than average during the strictest shutdowns from March 18 to May 15.Conclusion: During the first 3 months and strictest lockdown of the pandemic, the number of traumatic injuries was significantly lower than average.Once restaurants reopened at 50% capacity, bars reopened, and gatherings of <50 people were allowed, weekly counts of trauma patients were above average in most (26/32, 81%) weeks through the end of the year.Increased GSWs and assaults this year may suggest increased interpersonal conflict.Increased violent and traumatic injury necessitating medical care is concerning for emergency departments and hospitals already overloaded with patient volume and facing staffing shortages due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Background: The effects of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) on progression of traumatic brain injury (TBI) are unclear. Two hypotheses prevail: increased mean arterial pressure may improve cerebral perfusion, or cause cerebral edema due to elevated intracranial pressure. This study compares outcomes in hypotensive, blunt trauma patients with TBI treated with and without REBOA.
Methods: A retrospective analysis compared hypotensive (systolic blood pressure [SBP] >90) blunt trauma patients with TBI treated with REBOA to those treated without. Patients with spontaneous circulation at admission and at initiation of aortic occlusion were included. Patients requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the emergency department (ED) were excluded. Radius matching used age, injury severity score (ISS), abbreviated injury score (AIS)head, and Glasgow coma score (GCS) and SBP at ED arrival.
Results: Of 232 patients, 135 were treated with REBOA and 97 without. REBOA patients were older and had higher ISS, AIS-head, AIS-chest and AIS- extremity. There was no difference in TBI severity, and mortality. In the matched analysis (n = 76 REBOA, n = 54 non-REBOA), there was no difference in ISS, AIS-head, pre-hospital, ED, or discharge GCS, ED SBP, or mortality. Despite longer hospital stays for REBOA patients, there was no difference in intensive care unit length of stay, rate of discharge home, or discharge GCS.
Conclusions: REBOA was used in more severely injured patients, but was not associated with higher mortality rate. REBOA should be considered for use in patients with non-compressible torso hemorrhage and concomitant TBI, as it did not increase mortality, and outcomes were similar to non-REBOA patients.
The US incarcerates more individuals than any other country. Prisoners are the only population guaranteed health care by the US constitution, but little is known about their surgical needs. This multicenter study aimed to describe the acute care surgery (ACS) needs of incarcerated individuals.Twelve centers prospectively identified incarcerated patients evaluated in their emergency department by the ACS service. Centers collected diagnosis, treatment, and complications from chart review. Patients were classified as either emergency general surgery (EGS) patients or trauma patients and their characteristics and outcomes were investigated. Poisson regression accounting for clustering by center was used to calculate the relative risk (RR) of readmission, representation within 90 days, and failure to follow-up as an outpatient within 90 days for each cohort.More than 12 months, ACS services evaluated 943 patients, 726 (80.3%) from jail, 156 (17.3%) from prison, and 22 (2.4%) from other facilities. Most were men (89.7%) with a median age of 35 years (interquartile range, 27-47). Trauma patients comprised 54.4% (n = 513) of the cohort. Admission rates were similar for trauma (61.5%) and EGS patients (60.2%). Head injuries and facial fractures were the most common injuries, while infections were the most common EGS diagnosis. Self-harm resulted in 102 trauma evaluations (19.9%). Self-inflicted injuries were associated with increased risk of readmission (RR, 4.3; 95% confidence interval, 3.02-6.13) and reevaluation within 90 days (RR, 4.96; 95% confidence interval, 3.07-8.01).Incarcerated patients who present with a range of trauma and EGS conditions frequently require admission, and follow-up after hospitalization was low at the treating center. Poor follow-up coupled with high rates of assault, self-harm, mental health, and substance use disorders highlight the vulnerability of this population. Hospital and correctional facility interventions are needed to decrease self-inflicted injuries and assaults while incarcerated.Prognostic and epidemiological, Level III.
Trauma teams are often faced with patients on antithrombotic (AT) drugs, which is challenging when bleeding occurs. We sought to compare the effects of different AT medications on head injury severity and hypothesized that AT reversal would not improve mortality in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients.An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma-sponsored prospective, multicentered, observational study of 15 trauma centers was performed. Patient demographics, injury burden, comorbidities, AT agents, and reversal attempts were collected. Outcomes of interest were head injury severity and in-hospital mortality.Analysis was performed on 2,793 patients. The majority of patients were on aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid [ASA], 46.1%). Patients on a platelet chemoreceptor blocker (P2Y12) had the highest mean Injury Severity Score (9.1 ± 8.1). Patients taking P2Y12 inhibitors ± ASA, and ASA-warfarin had the highest head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) mean (1.2 ± 1.6). On risk-adjusted analysis, warfarin-ASA was associated with a higher head AIS (odds ratio [OR], 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-4.42) after controlling for Injury Severity Score, Charlson Comorbidity Index, initial Glasgow Coma Scale score, and initial systolic blood pressure. Among patients with severe TBI (head AIS score, ≥3) on antiplatelet therapy, reversal with desmopressin (DDAVP) and/or platelet transfusion did not improve survival (82.9% reversal vs. 90.4% none, p = 0.30). In severe TBI patients taking Xa inhibitors who received prothrombin complex concentrate, survival was not improved (84.6% reversal vs. 84.6% none, p = 0.68). With risk adjustment as described previously, mortality was not improved with reversal attempts (antiplatelet agents: OR 0.83; 85% CI, 0.12-5.9 [p = 0.85]; Xa inhibitors: OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.12-4.64; p = 0.77).Reversal attempts appear to confer no mortality benefit in severe TBI patients on antiplatelet agents or Xa inhibitors. Combination therapy was associated with severity of head injury among patients taking preinjury AT therapy, with ASA-warfarin possessing the greatest risk.Prognostic, level II.
Aim: The effects of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) on progression of traumatic brain injury (TBI) are unclear. Swine models have shown conflicting results, and human data is lacking. Two hypotheses largely prevail: increased mean arterial pressure caused by REBOA may improve cerebral perfusion, or conversely, cause cerebral edema due to elevated blood and intracranial pressure. This study aims to compare outcomes in patients with TBI treated with and without REBOA. Methods: A retrospective analysis compared blunt trauma patients with TBI treated with REBOA to those treated without. REBOA patients were selected from the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (AORTA) registry, and non-REBOA patients were selected from an institutional trauma registry. Patients with SBP > 0mmHg at admission and at initiation of aortic occlusion were included. Patients requiring CPR at ED were excluded. Propensity score matching was performed using age, gender, ISS, AIS-Head, and admission SBP. Results: After matching, 106 REBOA patients and 106 non-REBOA patients remained for analysis. REBOA patients had significantly higher ISS, but there was no difference in AIS-Head, pre-hospital or ED GCS, ED SBP, or in-hospital mortality (Table). Despite longer hospital stays for REBOA patients, there was no difference in ICU length of stay or rate of discharge home between groups. Conclusion: REBOA was used in more severely injured patients, but was not associated with higher mortality rate. Despite longer hospital stays for REBOA patients, discharge GCS and rate of discharge home, both favorable patient-centered outcomes, were similar between groups. REBOA use should be considered for use in patients with non-compressible torso hemorrhage and concomitant TBI, as it here it did not increase mortality, and outcomes upon discharge are similar to patients treated without REBOA.
