Search

Background Race is associated with differences in quality of care process measures and incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in trauma patients. We aimed to investigate if racial disparities exist in the administration of VTE prophylaxis in trauma patients. Methods We queried the Trauma Quality Improvement Project database from 2017 to 2019. Patients ages ≥16 years old with ISS ≥15 were included. Patients with no signs of life on arrival, any AIS ≥6, hospital length of stay Results A total of 285,341 patients were included. Black patients had the highest rates of VTE prophylaxis exposure (73.8%), shortest time to administration (1.6 days), and highest use of low molecular weight heparin (56%). Black patients also had the highest incidence of deep vein thrombosis (2.8%) and pulmonary embolism (1.4%). Black patients were 4% more likely to receive VTE prophylaxis than white patients [adj. IRR (95% CI): 1.04 (1.03-1.05), P < .001]. American Indians were 8% less likely to receive VTE prophylaxis [adj. IRR (95% CI): .92 (.88-.97), P < .001] than white patients. No differences between white and Asian or Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander patients existed. Discussion While black patients had the highest incidence of DVT and PE, they had higher administration rates and earlier initiation of VTE prophylaxis. Further work can elucidate modifiable causes of these differences.

Background Traumatic duodenal injury is a rare, potentially devastating condition with challenging management decisions. Contemporary literature on operative management of duodenal injury is lacking. The purpose of this study is to assess optimal management strategies based on outcomes of patients with traumatic duodenal injury at a single trauma center. Methods A retrospective study of patients with traumatic duodenal injury from 2013-2020 at a level 1 trauma center was performed. Patient demographics, grade of injury as noted on CT scan or intraoperatively, surgical procedure(s) performed, and resultant outcomes were extracted. Results After excluding one patient due to death on arrival, 23 patients met inclusion criteria. Injuries consisted of grade 1 (n = 7), grade 2 (n = 2), grade 3 (n = 12), and grade 5 (n = 2); there were no grade 4 injuries. Patients were predominantly male (83%) with a median age of 30 years old. Nineteen patients (82%) underwent surgery. Four of nine patients (44%) with grade 1/2 injuries had hematomas and were managed non-operatively. The remaining five patients (56%) with grade 1/2 injuries underwent operation, which included primary repair (n = 3), duodenal exclusion (n = 1), and periduodenal drainage (n = 1). Of 12 patients with grade 3 injury, 6 underwent primary repair and 6 underwent resection. Three patients who underwent primary repair and one who underwent resection developed a duodenal leak. All patients with grade 5 injury (n = 2) underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. Conclusion Grade 1 and 2 duodenal hematomas can be managed non-operatively, while lacerations require operative repair. Outcomes may be better following resection in patients with grade 3 injury.

Background Trauma centers are receiving increasing numbers of older trauma patients. There is a lack of literature on the outcomes for elderly trauma patients who undergo damage control laparotomy (DCL). We hypothesized that trauma centers with geriatric protocols would have better outcomes in elderly patients after DCL. Methods A retrospective chart review of consecutive adult trauma patients with DCL at 8 level 1 trauma centers was conducted from 2012 to 2018. Patients aged 40 or older were included. Age ≥ 55 years was defined as elderly. Demographics, injury information, clinical outcomes, including mortality, and complications were recorded. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results A total of 379 patients with DCLs were identified with an average age of 54.8 ± 0.4 years with 39.3% (n = 149/379) of patients aged ≥ 55. Geriatric protocols or a consulting geriatric service was present at 37.5% (n = 3/8) of institutions. Age ≥ 55 was a significant risk factor for in-hospital mortality (OR 2, 95% CI 1.0-4.0, P = .04). Institutions without dedicated geriatric trauma protocols/services had higher overall in-hospital mortality on both univariate (57.9% vs 34.3%, P = .02) and multivariate analyses (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3-3.4, P < .001). Conclusions Surgical management of older trauma patients remains a challenge. Geriatric protocols or dedicated services were found to be associated with improved outcomes. Future efforts should focus on standardizing the availability of these resources at trauma centers.

Objectives Fasciotomy to treat or prevent compartment syndromes in patients with truncal or peripheral arterial injuries is a valuable adjunct. The objective of this study was to document the current incidence, indications, and outcomes of below knee fasciotomy in patients with femoropopliteal arterial injuries. Methods The PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment registry of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma was utilized to identify patients undergoing two-incision four-compartment fasciotomy of the leg after repair of a femoropopliteal arterial injury. Outcomes after therapeutic versus prophylactic (surgeon label) fasciotomy were compared as was the technique of closure, that is, primary skin closure or application of a split-thickness skin graft (STSG). Results From 2013 to 2018, fasciotomy was performed in 158 patients overall, including 95.6% (151/158) at the initial operation. In the group of 139 patients who survived to discharge, fasciotomies were labeled as therapeutic in 58.3% (81/139) and prophylactic in 41.7% (58/139). There were no significant differences between the therapeutic and prophylactic groups in amputation rates (14.8% vs. 8.6%, P = .919). Primary skin closure was achieved at a median of 5.0 days vs. 11.0 days for STSG ( P = .001). Conclusions Over 55% of patients undergoing repair of an injury to a femoral or popliteal artery have a fasciotomy performed at the same operation. A “therapeutic” indication for fasciotomy continues to be more common than “prophylactic,” while outcomes are identical in both groups.