Search

Failed extubation in critically ill patients is associated with poor outcomes. In critically ill trauma patients who have failed extubation, providers must decide whether to proceed with tracheostomy or attempt extubation again. The aim of this study was to describe the natural history of failed extubation in trauma patients and determine whether tracheostomy or a second attempt at extubation is more appropriate. Trauma patients admitted to our level I trauma center from 2013 to 2019 were identified. Patients who failed extubation, defined as an unplanned reintubation within 48 h of extubation, were included. Patients who immediately underwent tracheostomy were compared with those who had subsequent attempts at extubation. The primary outcome was mortality, and the secondary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), ventilator days, and hospital LOS. The population included 93 patients who failed extubation and met inclusion criteria. A total of 53 patients were ultimately successfully extubated, whereas 40 patients underwent a tracheostomy. There was no statistically significant difference in demographics or injury patterns. Patients who underwent tracheostomy had a longer ICU LOS and more ventilator days. There was no difference in mortality or hospital LOS between the two groups. In trauma patients, those who underwent subsequent attempts at extubation did not experience higher rates of mortality than those who received a tracheostomy. Tracheostomy was associated with longer ICU LOS and ventilator days. In certain situations, it is appropriate to consider subsequent attempts at extubation in trauma patients who fail extubation rather than proceeding directly to tracheostomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tracheostomy is a commonly performed procedure in surgical intensive care units. Although the indications and benefits of this procedure are well known, little has been studied in the adult surgical/trauma population about patient family satisfaction after tracheostomy placement.Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective study at our academic level I trauma center from 2015-2016 in patients who underwent elective tracheostomy. Family members were asked to complete an eight-point questionnaire using a forced Likert scale of graded responses. Questionnaires were administered prior to tracheostomy and again at 24-and 72-hour post-tracheostomy placement. Responses were compared using univariate analysis.Results: A total of 26 family members completed all 3 surveys. Family members believed loved ones appeared more comfortable, were more interactive, and were better progressing clinically. After 72 hours, family members felt less anxiety. There was no difference in perceptions of patient distress, ability to provide support, or their worry about scars, or comfort in visiting them.Discussion: Family members believed tracheostomies provided greater patient comfort, increased interactive abilities, better progress in their care, and experienced less anxiety after placement. Family satisfaction may therefore be an additional benefit in support of earlier tracheostomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thromboelastography (TEG) with platelet mapping has been proposed as an assay to detect the presence of antiplatelet agents (APA), yet no study has evaluated TEG markers of platelet dysfunction in acute trauma patients stratified by the use of preinjury APA. We hypothesized that patients on preinjury APA would demonstrate prolonged TEG markers of platelet dysfunction compared with those not on preinjury APA. This retrospective review evaluated all trauma patients admitted to a Level I trauma center from February 2011 to April 2013 who received a TEG within the first 24 hours of admission. Patients were classified as receiving preinjury APA or no APA if their documented medications included either aspirin or adenosine diphosphate (ADP) antagonists, including clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor. A total of 129 patients were included (APA, n = 35; no APA n = 94) in the study. The time from admission to the first TEG was similar (APA 175 ± 289 minutes versus no APA 216 ± 321 minutes, P = 0.5). There was no significant difference in TEG markers of platelet dysfunction, including per cent ADP inhibition (APA 61.7 ± 25.8% versus no APA 62.3 ± 28.8%; P = 0.91) or per cent arachidonic acid inhibition (APA 58.2 ± 31% versus no APA 53.8 ± 34%; P = 0.54). Both groups had similar proportion of severe platelet dysfunction, defined as ADP inhibition greater than 70 per cent (APA 40% versus no APA 40%; P = 0.8) and arachidonic acid inhibition greater than 70 per cent (APA 40% versus no APA 39%; P = 0.89). In conclusion, platelet dysfunction after major trauma is common. Therefore, TEG alone should not be used to evaluate for the presence of APA due to apparent lack of specificity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Blunt traumatic abdominal wall hernias (TAWHs) are rare but require a variety of operative techniques to repair including bone anchor fixation (BAF) when tissue tears off bony structures. This study aimed to provide a descriptive analysis of BAF technique for blunt TAWH repair. Bone anchor fixation and no BAF repairs were compared, hypothesizing increased hernia recurrence with BAF repair. Methods: A secondary analysis of the WTA blunt TAWH multicenter study was performed including all patients who underwent repair of their TAWH. Patients with BAF were compared to those with no BAF with bivariate analyses. Results: 176 patients underwent repair of their TAWH with 41 (23.3%) undergoing BAF. 26 (63.4%) patients had tissue fixed to bone, with 7 of those reinforced with mesh. The remaining 15 (36.6%) patients had bridging mesh anchored to bone. The BAF group had a similar age, sex, body mass index, and injury severity score compared to the no BAF group. The time to repair (1 vs 1 days, P =.158), rate of hernia recurrence (9.8% vs 12.7%, P =.786), and surgical site infection (SSI) (12.5% vs 15.6%, P =.823) were all similar between cohorts. Conclusions: This largest series to date found nearly one-quarter of TAWH repairs required BAF. Bone anchor fixation repairs had a similar rate of hernia recurrence and SSI compared to no BAF repairs, suggesting this is a reasonable option for repair of TAWH. However, future prospective studies are needed to compare specific BAF techniques and evaluate long-term outcomes including patient-centered outcomes such as pain and quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the standard of care for the treatment of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) requiring intervention. Data suggest that low-grade BTAI (grade I [intimal tears] or grade II [intramural hematoma]) will resolve spontaneously if treated with nonoperative management (NOM) alone. There has been no comparison specifically between the use of NOM vs TEVAR for low-grade BTAI. We hypothesize that these low-grade injuries can be safely managed with NOM alone. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of all patients with a low-grade BTAI in the Aortic Trauma Foundation Registry from 2016 to 2021 was performed. The study population was 1 primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included complications, ICU length of stay, and ventilator days. RESULTS: A total of 880 patients with BTAI were enrolled. Of the 269 patients with low-grade BTAI, 218 (81%) were treated with NOM alone (81% grade I, 19% grade II), whereas 51 (19%) underwent a TEVAR (20% grade I, 80% grade II). There was no difference in demographic or mechanism of injury in patients with low-grade BTAI who underwent NOM vs TEVAR. There was a difference in mortality between NOM alone and TEVAR (8% vs 18%, p = 0.009). Aortic-related mortality was 0.5% in the NOM group and 4% in the TEVAR group (p = 0.06). Hospital and ICU length of stay and ventilator days were not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: NOM alone is safe and appropriate management for low-grade BTAI, with lower mortality and decreased rates of complication when compared with routine initial TEVAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Massive transfusion (MT) is a lifesaving treatment for hemorrhaging patients. Predicting the need for MT is crucial to improve survival. The aim of our study was to validate the Revised Assessment of Bleeding and Transfusion (RABT) score to predict MT in a multicenter cohort of trauma patients. Methods: We performed a (2015–2017) analysis of adult (age ≥ 18 year) trauma patients who had a high-level trauma team activation at three Level I trauma centers. The RABT was calculated using the 4-point score [blunt (0)/penetrating trauma (1), shock index ≥ 1 (1), pelvic fracture (1), and FAST positive (1)]. A RABT score of ≥ 2 was used to predict MT (≥ 10 units of packed red blood cells within 24 h). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated to assess the score's predictive power compared to the Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC) score. Results: We analyzed 1018 patients: 216 (facility I), 363 (facility II), and 439 (facility III). The mean age was 41 ± 19 year, and the injury severity score (ISS) was 29 [22–36]. The overall MT rate was 19%. The overall AUROC of RABT ≥ 2 was 0.89. The sensitivity of the RABT ≥ 2 was 78%, and the specificity was 91%. The RABT score had a higher sensitivity (78% vs. 69%) and specificity (91% vs. 82%) than the ABC score. Conclusion: The RABT score is a valid tool to predict MT in severely injured trauma patients. It is an objective score that aids clinicians in predicting the need for MT to mobilize blood products and minimize the waste of resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Retained rectal foreign bodies are a common but incompletely studied problem. This study defined the epidemiology, injury severity, and outcomes after rectal injuries following foreign body insertion. Twenty-two level I trauma centers retrospectively identified all patients sustaining a rectal injury in this AAST multi-institutional trial (2005-2014). Only patients injured by foreign body insertion were included in this secondary analysis. Exclusion criteria were death before rectal injury management or ≤48 h of admission. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were collected. Study groups were defined as partial thickness (AAST grade I) versus full thickness (AAST grades II-V) injuries. Subgroup analysis was performed by management strategy (nonoperative versus operative). After exclusions, 33 patients were identified. Mean age was 41 y (range 18-57), and 85% (n = 28) were male. Eleven (33%) had full thickness injuries and 22 (67%) had partial thickness injuries, of which 14 (64%) were managed nonoperatively and 8 (36%) operatively (proximal diversion alone [ n = 3, 14%]; direct repair with proximal diversion [ n = 2, 9%]; laparotomy without rectal intervention [ n = 2, 9%]; and direct repair alone [ n = 1, 5%]). Subgroup analysis of outcomes after partial thickness injury demonstrated significantly shorter hospital length of stay (2 ± 1; 2 [1-5] versus 5 ± 2; 4 [2-8] d, P = 0.0001) after nonoperative versus operative management. Although partial thickness rectal injuries do not require intervention, difficulty excluding full thickness injuries led some surgeons in this series to manage partial thickness injuries operatively. This was associated with significantly longer hospital length of stay. Therefore, we recommend nonoperative management after a retained rectal foreign body unless full thickness injury is conclusively identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent studies have established cefepime as an effective treatment option for AmpC beta-lactamase (AmpC) Enterobacterales; however, the efficacy of beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors is unclear. Objective: The objective of this study was to determine if piperacillintazobactamis an appropriate alternative to cefepime for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) secondary to AmpC-producing organisms. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted in hospitalized adults with an IAI caused by an AmpC-producing organism and received either cefepime or piperacillin-tazobactam for definitive treatment after a source control procedure. The primary outcome was a composite of surgical site infections, recurrent IAIs, or in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the composite outcome, hospital length of stay (LOS), microbiologic failure, study antibiotic duration, time to clinical resolution, and incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). Results: This study included 119 patients. There was no difference in the primary outcome between the cefepime and piperacillin-tazobactam groups (35% vs 27%, P = 0.14). Microbiological failure was the only secondary outcome with an observed difference between groups (17% vs 0%, P = 0.01): hospital LOS (15 vs 13 days, P = 0.09), days of therapy (7 vs 7 days, P = 0.87), time to clinical resolution (7 vs 4 days, P = 0.30), and CDI (1% vs 2%, P = 0.58) were all similar. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Most blunt liver injuries are treated with nonoperative management (NOM), and angiointervention (AI) has become a common adjunct. This study evaluated the use of AI, blood product utilization, pharmacological venous thromboembolic prophylaxis (VTEp), and outcomes in severe blunt liver trauma managed nonoperatively at level I versus II trauma centers. Methods: American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) study (2013-2016), including adult patients with severe blunt liver injuries (AIS score>/= 3) treated with NOM, was conducted. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics, severity of liver injury (AIS), use of AI, blood product utilization, and VTEp were collected. Outcomes included survival, complications, failure of NOM, blood product utilization, and length of stay (LOS). Results: Study included 2825 patients: 2230(78.9%) in level I and 595(21.1%) in level II centers. There was no difference in demographics, clinical presentation, or injury severity between centers. Angiointervention was used in 6.4% in level I and 7.2% in level II centers (P=.452). Level II centers were less likely to use LMWH for VTEp (.003). There was no difference in mortality or failure of NOM. In level II centers, there was a significantly higher 24-hour blood product utilization (PRBC P =.015 and platelets P =.002), longer ventilator days (P =.012), and longer ICU (P<.001) and hospital LOS (P =.024). The incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia was significantly higher in level II centers (P =.003). Conclusion: Utilization of AI and NOM success rates is similar in level I and II centers. However, the early blood utilization, ventilator days, and VAP complications are significantly higher in level II centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sarcopenia is a clinically relevant loss of muscle mass with implications of increased morbidity and mortality in adult trauma populations. Our study aimed to evaluate loss of muscle mass change in adult trauma patients with prolonged hospital stays. Retrospective analysis using institutional trauma registry to identify all adult trauma patients with hospital length of stay >14 days admitted to our Level 1 center between 2010 and 2017. All CT images were reviewed, and cross-sectional area (cm2) of the left psoas muscle was measured at the level of the third lumbar vertebral body to determine total psoas area (TPA) and Total Psoas Index (TPI) normalized for patient stature. Sarcopenia was defined as a TPI on admission below gender specific thresholds of 5.45(cm2/m2) in men and 3.85(cm2/m2) in women. TPA, TPI, and rates of change in TPI were then evaluated and compared between sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic adult trauma patients. There were 81 adult trauma patients who met inclusion criteria. The average change in TPA was -3.8 cm2 and TPI was -1.3 cm2. On admission, 23% (n = 19) of patients were sarcopenic while 77% (n = 62) were not. Non-sarcopenic patients had a significantly greater change in TPA (-4.9 vs. -0.31, p <0.0001), TPI (-1.7 vs. -0.13, p <0.0001), and rate of decrease in muscle mass (p = 0.0002). 37% of patients who were admitted with normal muscle mass developed sarcopenia during admission. Older age was the only risk factor independently associated with developing sarcopenia (OR: 1.04, 95%CI 1.00–1.08, p = 0.045). Over a third of patients with normal muscle mass at admission subsequently developed sarcopenia with older age as the primary risk factor. Patients with normal muscle mass at admission had greater decreases in TPA and TPI, and accelerated rates of muscle mass loss compared to sarcopenic patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Although evidence suggests that racial and ethnic minority (REM) patients receive inadequate pain management in the acute care setting, it remains unclear whether these disparities also occur during the prehospital period. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of race and ethnicity on prehospital analgesic use by emergency medical services (EMS) in trauma patients. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of adult trauma patients aged 18 to 89 years old transported by EMS to our American College of Surgeons-verified level 1 trauma center from 2014 to 2020. Patients who identified as Black, Asian, Native American, or Other for race and/or Hispanic or Latino or Unknown for ethnicity were considered REM. Patients who identified as White, non-Hispanic were considered White. Groups were compared in univariate and multivariate analysis. The primary outcome was prehospital analgesic administration. RESULTS: A total of 2,476 patients were transported by EMS (47% White and 53% REM). White patients were older on average (46 years vs 38 years; p < 0.001) and had higher rates of blunt trauma (76% vs 60%; p < 0.001). There were no differences in Injury Severity Score (21 vs 20; p = 0.22). Although REM patients reported higher subjective pain rating (7.2 vs 6.6; p = 0.002), they were less likely to get prehospital pain medication (24% vs 35%; p < 0.001), and that difference remained significant after controlling for baseline characteristics, transport method, pain rating, prehospital hypotension, and payor status (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.67 [0.47 to 0.96]; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Patients from racial and ethnic minority groups were less likely to receive prehospital pain medication after traumatic injury than White patients. Forms of conscious and unconscious bias contributing to this inequity need to be identified and addressed. (J Am Coll Surg 2023;236:461-467. © 2022 by the American College of Surgeons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study evaluates the utility of chest (CXR) and pelvis (PXR) X-ray, as adjuncts to the primary survey, in screening geriatric blunt trauma (GBT) patients for abdominal injury or need for laparotomy.Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients 65-89 years in the 2014 National Trauma Data Bank. X-ray injuries were identified by ICD9 codes and defined as any injury felt to be readily detectable by a non-radiologist. X-ray findings were dichotomized as "both negative" (no injury presumptively apparent on CXR or PXR) or "either positive" (any injury presumptively apparent on CXR or PXR). Rates of abdominal injuries and laparotomy were compared and used to calculate sensitivity and specificity. The primary outcomes were abdominal injury and laparotomy. The secondary outcomes included mortality, ventilator days, and hospital days.Results: A total of 202 553 patients met criteria. Overall, 9% of patients with either positive X-rays had abdominal injury and 2% laparotomy vs. 1.1% and .3% with both negative (P < .001). The specificity for any positive X-ray was 79% for abdominal injury and 78% for laparotomy. The sensitivity was 69% for abdominal injury and laparotomy. The either positive group had fewer ventilator days (.3 vs. .8, P < .0001), longer length of stay (7 vs. 5, P < .0001), and higher mortality (6% vs. 4%, P < .0001) vs both negative.Conclusion: CXR and PXR can be used to assess for intra-abdominal injury and need for laparotomy. GBT patients with either positive X-rays should continue workup regardless of mechanism due to the high specificity of this tool for abdominal injury and need for laparotomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Large animal-related injuries (LARI) are relatively uncommon, but, nevertheless, a public hazard. The objective of this study was to better understand LARI injury patterns and outcomes.Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of the 2016 National Trauma Data Bank and used ICD-10 codes to identify patients injured by a large animal. The primary outcome was severe injury pattern, while secondary outcomes included mortality, hospital length of stay, ICU admission, and mechanical ventilation usage.Results: There were 6,662 LARI included in our analysis. Most LARI (66%) occurred while riding the animal, and the most common type of LARI was fall from horse (63%). The median ISS was 9 and the most severe injuries (AIS ≥ 3) were to the chest (19%), head (10%), and lower extremities (10%). The overall mortality was low at 0.8%. Compared to non-riders, riders sustained more severe injuries to the chest (21% vs. 16%, p<0.001) and spine (4% vs. 2%, p<0.001). Compared to motor vehicle collisions (MVC), riders sustained fewer severe injuries to the head (10% vs. 12%, p<0.001) and lower extremity (10% vs. 12%, p=0.01). Compared to auto-pedestrian accidents, non-riders sustained fewer severe injuries to the head (11% vs. 19%, p<0.001) and lower extremity (10% vs. 20%, p<0.001).Conclusion: Patients involved in a LARI are moderately injured with more complex injuries occurring in the chest, head, and lower extremities. Fall from horse was the most common LARI mechanism. Overall mortality was low. Compared to non-riders, riders were more likely to sustain severe injuries to the chest and spine. Severe injury patterns were similar when comparing riders to MVC and, given that most LARI are riding injuries, we recommend trauma teams approach LARI as they would an MVC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Field vital signs are integral in the American College of Surgeons (ASA) Committee on Trauma (COT) triage criteria for trauma team activation (TTA). Reliability of field vital signs in predicting first emergency department (ED) vital signs, however, may depend upon prehospital time. The study objective was to define the effect of prehospital time on correlation between field and first ED vital signs.Methods: All highest level TTAs at two Level I trauma centers (2008-2018) were screened. Exclusions were unrecorded prehospital vital signs and those dead on arrival. Demographics, prehospital time (scene time + transport time), injury data, and vital signs were collected. Differences between field and first ED vitals were determined using the paired Student's t test. Propensity score analysis, adjusting for age, sex, injury severity score (ISS), and mechanism of injury compared outcomes among patients with ISS ≥16. Multivariate linear regression determined impact of prehospital time on vital sign differences between field and ED among propensity-matched patients.Results: After exclusions, 21 499 patients remained. Mean prehospital time was 32 vs. 41 minutes (P < .001). On propensity score analysis, longer prehospital time was associated with significantly greater differences in systolic blood pressure (SBP) (P < .001), pulse pressure (PP) (P = .003), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, linear regression that demonstrated longer prehospital time was associated with greater differences in SBP, heart rate (HR), and PP (P < .001).Conclusions: Field vital signs are less likely to reflect initial ED vital signs when prehospital times are longer. Given the reliance of trauma triage criteria on prehospital vital signs, medical providers must be cognizant of this pitfall during the prehospital assessment of trauma patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality for critically injured trauma patients. The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) practice guideline is the most up-to-date classification for AKI. The aims of this study were to determine the incidence and risk factors for AKI in critically injured trauma patients using the current KDIGO definitions.Study Design: A prospective cohort study was performed at our academic, level 1 trauma center, from September 2017 to August 2018. All adult trauma patients admitted to the surgical ICU were included. The primary outcome was the development of AKI, as defined by KDIGO. Secondary outcomes included hospital and ICU length of stay, ventilator days, and mortality.Results: There were 466 patients included and 314 (67%) developed AKI. Those who developed AKI were more often hypotensive on admission (7% vs 2%), had higher Injury Severity Scores (ISS) (19 vs 13), were more likely to have severe injuries to the chest (40% vs 24%) and extremities (20% vs 6%), received transfusion (41% vs 21%), sustained crush injuries (8% vs 1%), received radiocontrast (75% vs 47%), nephrotoxic medication (74% vs 60%), or vasopressors (15% vs 3%). After multivariate analysis, risk factors independently associated with AKI include age, Injury Severity Score (ISS), severe extremity injuries, radiocontrast, and vasopressors. Those who developed AKI had higher mortality (9% vs 2%).Conclusions: Using current KDIGO criteria, the incidence of AKI in critically injured trauma patients was higher than previously reported. Older patients, with more severe injuries to their extremities and chest and who have suffered crush injuries, appear to be the most a risk. AKI in the critically injured patient results in an almost 5-fold increase in mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After traumatic injury, primary anastomosis after colon resection has overtaken ostomy diversion. Improved technology facilitating primary anastomosis speed and integrity may have driven this change. Trends in ostomy versus anastomosis have yet to be quantified, and recent literature comparing outcomes is incomplete. The National Trauma Databank (2007-2014) was queried for all blunt colon injuries requiring resection. Patients were dichotomized into study groups based on whether they underwent ostomy creation. Ostomy creation frequency was compared over time. After subgrouping patients by colon injury location, multivariate regression adjusted for baseline characteristics and evaluated the impact of ostomy on clinical outcomes. A total of 13,949 colon injuries requiring colectomy were identified. Ostomy frequency did not vary by study year (P = 0.536). Univariate analysis showed that patients undergoing ostomy were older (median, 40 versus 32; P < 0.001) and more often had comorbidities (65% versus 56%; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that ostomy creation was significantly associated with lower mortality after sigmoid colon injury (odds ratio, 0.512; P = 0.011) and higher rates of unplanned reoperation after transverse colon injury (odds ratio, 3.135; P = 0.048). Across all colon injuries, ostomies were significantly associated with longer hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, and ventilator days. Ostomy creation for colonic injury has reached an equilibrium trough. The impact of ostomy creation varies by not only clinical outcome but also injury location. Further study is needed to define the optimal surgical management for blunt colon injuries requiring resection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Mesh use is associated with increased risk of surgical site infection. • Mesh use is not associated with improved recurrence. • The benefits of reinforcing mesh placement are questionable. Blunt traumatic abdominal wall hernias (TAWH) occur in <1 % of trauma patients. Optimal repair techniques, such as mesh reinforcement, have not been studied in detail. We hypothesize that mesh use will be associated with increased surgical site infections (SSI) and not improve hernia recurrence. A secondary analysis of the Western Trauma Association blunt TAWH multicenter study was performed. Patients who underwent TAWH repair during initial hospitalization (1/2012–12/2018) were included. Mesh repair patients were compared to primary repair patients (non-mesh). A logistic regression was conducted to assess risk factors for SSI. 157 patients underwent TAWH repair during index hospitalization with 51 (32.5 %) having mesh repair: 24 (45.3 %) synthetic and 29 (54.7 %) biologic. Mesh patients were more commonly smokers (43.1 % vs. 22.9 %, p = 0.016) and had a larger defect size (10 vs. 6 cm, p = 0.003). Mesh patients had a higher rate of SSI (25.5 % vs. 9.5 %, p = 0.016) compared to non-mesh patients, but a similar rate of recurrence (13.7 % vs. 10.5%, p = 0.742), hospital length of stay (LOS), and mortality. Mesh use (OR 3.66) and higher ISS (OR 1.06) were significant risk factors for SSI in a multivariable model. Mesh was used more frequently in flank TAWH and those with a larger defect size. Mesh use was associated with a higher incidence and risk of SSI but did not reduce the risk of hernia recurrence. When repairing TAWH mesh should be employed judiciously, and prospective randomized studies are needed to identify clear indications for mesh use in TAWH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]