Search

Vascular injury is a leading cause of death and disability in military and civilian settings. Most wartime and an increasing amount of civilian vascular trauma arises from penetrating mechanisms of injury due to gunshot or explosion. The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive examination of penetrating lower extremity arterial injury and to characterize long-term limb salvage and differences related to mechanisms of injury.The military trauma registries of the United States and the United Kingdom were analyzed to identify service members who sustained penetrating lower limb arterial injury (2001-2014). Treatment and limb salvage data were studied and comparisons made of patients whose penetrating vascular trauma arose from explosion (group 1) vs gunshot (group 2). Standardized statistical testing was used, with Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons.The cohort consisted of 568 combat casualties (mean age, 25.2 years) with 597 injuries (explosion, n = 416; gunshot, n = 181). Group 1 had higher Injury Severity Score (P .05) and Mangled Extremity Severity Score (P .0001), required more blood transfusion (P .05), and had more tibial (P .01) and popliteal (P .05) arterial injuries; group 2 had more profunda femoris injuries (P .05). Initial surgical management for the whole cohort included vein interposition graft (33%), ligation (31%), primary repair with or without patch angioplasty (16%), temporary vascular shunting (15%), and primary amputation (6%). No difference in patency of arterial reconstruction was found between group 1 and group 2, although group 1 had a higher incidence of primary (13% vs 2%; P .05) and secondary (19% vs 9%; P .05) amputation. Similarly, longer term freedom from amputation was lower for group 1 than for group 2 (68% vs 89% at 5.5 years; Cox hazard ratio, 0.30; P .0001), as was physical functioning (36-Item Short Form Health Survey data; mean, 39.80 vs 43.20; P .05).The majority of wartime lower extremity arterial injuries result from an explosive mechanism that preferentially affects the tibial vasculature and results in poorer long-term limb salvage compared with those injured with firearms. The mortality associated with immediate limb salvage attempts is low, and delayed amputations occur weeks later, affording the patient involvement in the decision-making and rehabilitation planning. We recommend assertive attempts at vascular repair and limb salvage for service members injured by explosive and gunshot mechanisms.

Objective Vascular injury is a leading cause of death and disability in military and civilian trauma. Although a previous interim study defined the distribution of vascular injury during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a contemporary epidemiologic assessment has not been performed. The objective of this study was to provide a current analysis of vascular injury during the final 7 years of the war in Afghanistan, including characterization of anatomic injury patterns, mechanisms of injury, and methods of acute management. Methods The Department of Defense Trauma Registry was analyzed to identify U.S. military service members who sustained a battle-related vascular injury and survived to be treated at a surgical facility in Afghanistan between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2015. All battle-related injuries (nonreturn to duty) were used as a denominator to establish the injury rate. Mechanism and anatomic distribution of injury as well as the acute management strategies of revascularization, ligation, and use of endovascular techniques were defined. Results Of 3900 service members who sustained a battle-related injury, 685 patients (17.6%) had 1105 vascular injuries (1.6 vascular injuries per patient). Extremity trauma accounted for 72% (n = 796) of vascular injuries, followed by the torso (17%; n = 188) and cervical (11%; n = 118) regions. Lower extremity vascular injury was the most prevalent anatomic location (45%; 501/1105). Explosion with fragment penetration accounted for 70% (477/685) of injuries, whereas gunshot wounds accounted for 30% (205/685). Open repair was performed in 559 cases (57%; 554/981), whereas ligation was the initial management strategy in 40% (395/981) of cases. In addition, 374 diagnostic endovascular procedures were completed, 27 therapeutic endovascular interventions to include stent placement and angioplasty were performed and 55 inferior vena cava filters were placed. Mortality of the vascular injury cohort was 5%. Conclusions The rate of vascular injury in modern combat is higher than that reported in previous wars. Open reconstruction is performed in half of cases, although ligation is an important damage control option, especially for minor or distal vessel injuries. Angiographic techniques are increasingly being used and documented within wartime registries more than ever. Proficiency with open and endovascular methods of vascular injury management remains a critical need for the U.S. military and will require partnership with civilian institutions to attain and maintain.

Background Cervical carotid artery injuries entail high morbidity and mortality and are technically challenging to repair. This retrospective study describes the management and outcomes of cervical carotid injuries sustained during the recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Methods The Department of Defense Trauma Registry was queried to identify US military personnel who sustained battle-related cervical carotid injury between January 2002 and December 2015. Retrospective chart reviews of the military Electronic Health Record were performed on patients identified. Demographics, injury characteristics, surgical management, and outcomes were reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed to identify associations between injury and management factors, as well as stroke and mortality. Results In total, 67 patients (100% male; age, 25 ± 7 years) were identified with cervical carotid artery injuries. Fifty-six patients (84%) sustained a common carotid artery (CCA) or internal carotid artery (ICA) injury, and 11 patients (16%) had an isolated external carotid artery (ECA) injury. The anatomic distribution of injury was as follows: CCA, 26 (38.8%); ICA, 24 (35.8%); CCA and ICA 2 (3%); ICA and ECA 3 (4.5%); and CCA, ICA, and ECA 1 (1.5%). Of the 56 CCA or ICA injuries, 39 underwent vascular repair, 9 (16%) were managed with ligation, 1 was treated with a temporary vascular shunt but succumbed to injuries before vascular repair, and 7 (13%) were treated nonoperatively. Seven (23%) of 30 ICA injuries were ligated compared with 2 (7.7%) of 26 injuries isolated to the CCA (p = 0.02). Compared with repair, ligation of the CCA/ICA was associated with a higher rate of stroke (89% vs. 33%, p = 0.003) and increased mortality without statistical significance (22% vs. 10%, p = 0.3). Every patient who underwent ICA ligation had a stroke (7/7). There was no difference in Injury Severity Score between the ligation and repair groups (23.8 ± 10.6 vs. 24.7 ± 13.4, p = 0.9). At a mean follow-up of 34.5 months, 10 of 17 stroke survivors had permanent neurologic deficits. Conclusion In modern combat, penetrating injuries involving the cervical carotid arteries are relatively infrequent. In this experience, isolated ICA injuries were three times more likely to be ligated than those involving the CCA. As a surgical maneuver, ICA ligation resulted in stroke in all cases. Level of evidence Retrospective cohort analysis, level III.

Importance Trauma is the leading cause of death for US individuals younger than 45 years, and uncontrolled hemorrhage is a major cause of trauma mortality. The US military’s medical advancements in the field of prehospital hemorrhage control have reduced battlefield mortality by 44%. However, despite support from many national health care organizations, no integrated approach to research has been made regarding implementation, epidemiology, education, and logistics of prehospital hemorrhage control by layperson immediate responders in the civilian sector. Objective To create a national research agenda to help guide future work for prehospital hemorrhage control by laypersons. Evidence Review The 2-day, in-person, National Stop the Bleed (STB) Research Consensus Conference was conducted on February 27 to 28, 2019, to identify and achieve consensus on research gaps. Participants included (1) subject matter experts, (2) professional society–designated leaders, (3) representatives from the federal government, and (4) representatives from private foundations. Before the conference, participants were provided a scoping review on layperson prehospital hemorrhage control. A 3-round modified Delphi consensus process was conducted to determine high-priority research questions. The top items, with median rating of 8 or more on a Likert scale of 1 to 9 points, were identified and became part of the national STB research agenda. Findings Forty-five participants attended the conference. In round 1, participants submitted 487 research questions. After deduplication and sorting, 162 questions remained across 5 a priori–defined themes. Two subsequent rounds of rating generated consensus on 113 high-priority, 27 uncertain-priority, and 22 low-priority questions. The final prioritized research agenda included the top 24 questions, including 8 for epidemiology and effectiveness, 4 for materials, 9 for education, 2 for global health, and 1 for health policy. Conclusions and Relevance The National STB Research Consensus Conference identified and prioritized a national research agenda to support laypersons in reducing preventable deaths due to life-threatening hemorrhage. Investigators and funding agencies can use this agenda to guide their future work and funding priorities. Funding Agencies|Gillian Reny Stepping Strong Center for Trauma Innovation; National Center for Disaster Medicine and Public Health

Observational/retrospective/historic controls, level IV.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) for control of noncompressible torso hemorrhage is a technology that is increasingly being utilized in the combat casualty setting. Its use in the resource restricted environment holds potential to improve hemorrhage control, decrease blood product utilization, decrease morbidity, and improve combat mortality. The objective of this report is to present the single largest series of REBOA use on severely injured combat casualties.Over an 18-month period, austere surgical teams comprised of coalition partners provided initial damage control resuscitation (DCR) and surgical stabilization for over 2,300 combat casualties prior to transferring patients to the next level of trauma care.Twenty patients presented with injuries from explosion and gunshot wounds with mean initial heart rate of 129 bpm and mean initial systolic blood pressure of 71 mm Hg. Femoral cutdowns were used in six patients. Aortic occlusion was achieved with REBOA catheter placement in Zone 1 (n = 17) and Zone 3 (n = 2). Systolic blood pressure increased an average of 56 mm Hg with aortic occlusion. There were no access related site complications. All patients survived transport to the next level of care. The majority of blood products transfused in this cohort were whole blood, largely supported by emergent blood drives.This series demonstrates the potential for REBOA as a lifesaving technique for the patient who presents with hemodynamic instability and noncompressible torso hemorrhage. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta allows austere surgical teams to rapidly stabilize severely injured combat casualties, expand capability, and provide enhanced DCR while minimizing personnel, resources, and blood product utilization. The use of "whole blood only" strategy for DCR shows potential to be superior to traditional component therapy, and when combined with "proactive" REBOA utilization, provides significant improvements in hemodynamics and hemorrhage control.Case series, level V.

Objective To describe the long-term outcomes of military lower-extremity vascular injuries, and the decision making of surgeons treating these injuries. Background Lower-extremity vascular trauma is an important cause of preventable death and severe disability, and decisions on amputation or limb salvage can be difficult. Additionally, the complexity of the condition is not amenable to controlled study, and there is limited data to guide clinical decision making and establish sensible treatment expectations during rehabilitation. Methods A cohort study of 554 US service members who sustained lower-extremity vascular injury in Iraq or Afghanistan (March 2003 to February 2012) was performed using the military's trauma registry, its electronic health record, patient interviews, and quality-of-life surveys. Long-term surgical and functional outcomes, and the timing and rationale of surgical decisions, were analyzed. Results Of 579 injured extremities, 49 (8.5%) underwent primary amputation and 530 (91.5%) an initial attempt at salvage. Ninety extremities underwent secondary amputation, occurring in the early (n = 60; 30 days) phases after injury. For salvage attempts, freedom from amputation 10 years after injury was 82.7% (79.1%-85.7%). Long-term physical and mental health outcomes were similar between service members who underwent reconstruction and those who underwent amputation. Conclusion This military experience provides data that will inform an array of military and civilian providers who care for patients with severe lower-extremity injury. While the majority salvage attempts endure, success is hindered by ischemia and necrosis during the acute stage and pain, dysfunction and infection in the later phases of recovery. Level of evidence Therapeutic/prognostic, level III.

Assess the impact of ostomy formation on quality of life for U.S. Service Members.U.S. personnel sustaining colorectal trauma from 2003 to 2011 were identified using the Department of Defense Trauma Registry. A cross-sectional observational study was conducted utilizing prospective interviews with standard survey instruments. Primary outcome measures were the Stoma Quality of Life Scale and Veterans RAND 36 scores and subjective responses. Patients with colorectal trauma not requiring ostomy served as controls.Of 177 available patients, 90 (50.8%) male veterans consented to participate (55 ostomy, 35 control). No significant differences were observed between ostomy and control groups for Injury Severity Score (25.6 ± 9.9 vs. 22.9 ± 11.8, p = 0.26) or mechanism of injury (blast: 55 vs. 52%, p = 0.75); nonostomates had fewer anorectal injuries (3.2 vs. 47.9%, p0.01). Median follow-up was 6.7 years. Veterans RAND-36 Physical and Mental Component Scores were similar between groups. About 45.8% of ostomates were willing-to-trade a median of 10 years (interquartile range = 5-15) of their remaining life for gastrointestinal continuity. At last follow-up, 95.9% of respondents' combat-related ostomies were reversed with a median duration of 6 (range = 3-19) months diverted.Ostomy creation in a combat environment remains safe and does not have a quantifiable impact on long-term quality of life.

This issue of the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery features topics from the 2017 Military Health System Research Symposium and starts a second decade of partnership between the Combat Casualty Care Research Program (CCCRP) and the journal. This publication comes at a time of significant change for the CCCRP, as it responds to military planning for the future multidomain battlefield (MDB). The projected MDB portends markedly different operational scenarios than those conducted over the past 17 years. Emerging threats around the globe have the Department of Defense preparing for more complex battlefields that are larger in size and scope and which pit the United States against better equipped and more sophisticated adversaries. As the CCCRP navigates this new reckoning associated with trauma care on the MDB, its research investments will need to be robust and enabled to plan, program, and budget for agile and closer-term solutions. To accomplish this, the program will need to expand on its strong foundation of lessons learned and assets developed over the past 20 years.

Objectives The incidence of wartime upper extremity vascular injury (UEVI) has been stable for the past century. The objective of this study is to provide a contemporary review of wartime UEVI, including epidemiologic characterization and description of early limb loss. Methods The Department of Defense Trauma Registry (DoDTR) was queried to identify U.S. service members who sustained a battle-related UEVI in Afghanistan between January 2009 and December 2015. Anatomic distribution of injury, mechanism of injury (MOI), associated injuries, early management, and early limb loss were analyzed. Results Analysis identified 247 casualties who sustained 308 UEVI. The most common injury was to the vessels distal to the brachial bifurcation (63.3%, n=195), followed by the brachial vessels (27.3%, n=84) and the axillary vessels (9.4%, n=29). The predominant MOIs were penetrating explosive fragments (74.1%, n=183) and gunshot wounds (25.9%, n=64). Associated fractures were identified in 151 (61.1%) casualties, and nerve injuries in 133 (53.8%). Angiography was performed in 91 (36.8%) casualties, and endovascular treatment was performed 10 (4%) times. Temporary vascular shunts were placed in 39 (15.8%) casualties. Data on surgical management was available for 171 injuries, and included repair (48%, n=82) and ligation (52%, n=89). The early limb loss rate was 12.1% (n=30). For all casualties sustaining early limb loss, the MOI was penetrating fragments from an explosion, the average injury severity score (ISS) was 32.3 and the mortality was 6.7% (n=2). In those without amputation, the ISS and mortality were lower at 20 and 4.6% (n=10), respectively. Overall mortality was 4.9% (n=12). Conclusions The early limb loss rate was increased compared to initial descriptions from Operation Iraqi Freedom. Amputations are associated with a higher ISS. Improved data capture and fidelity, or differing MOIs, may account for this trend. Proficiency with open and endovascular therapy remains a critical focus for combat casualty care.

Intensive blood use is expected to occur at levels, which will overwhelm blood supplies as they exist with current capabilities and technologies, both in civilian mass casualty events and military battlefield trauma. New technologies are needed for trauma care, and specifically to provide safer, more effective, and more logistically supportable blood products to treat patients with, or at risk of developing, acquired bleeding disorders resulting from trauma, acute radiation exposure, or other causes. Three of the primary agencies with major research and development programs related to blood products, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), the Department of Defense (DoD), and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute are uniquely positioned to partner in addressing these issues, which have significant implications for each respective agency, as well as for the US population. Providing leadership, coordination, and oversight for the Food and Drug Administration’s national and global health security, counterterrorism, and emerging threats portfolios, the US Food and Drug Administration Office of Counterterrorism and Emerging Threats serves in a critical advisory and facilitative role regarding development and availability of blood products. This plan is informed by the 2012 PHEMCE Strategy (US Department of Health and Human Services, 2012), the 2007 “Shaping the Future of Research” Strategic Plan for the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the 2011 BARDA Strategic Plan, the DoD Combat Casualty Care Research Program: Policy Review, the 2015 DoD Hemorrhage and Resuscitation Research and Development Strategic Plan, and more than 30 participants from other agencies who participated in planning.

The Russian military surgeon Nikolai Korotkov is known worldwide, mainly among internists and cardiovascular specialists, as the discoverer of the auscultatory method of measuring arterial blood pressure in 1905. This article reveals him as one of the first military vascular surgeons to carefully investigate, analyze, and register cases of vascular injury during his voluntarily trips to the Russian Far East in 1900 to 1901 and the Russo-Japanese War of 1904 to 1905. Examining 44 patients with extremity arterial and arterial-venous pseudoaneurysms following war-related injury, he routinely performed a measure termed the "arterial pressure index" using "Korotkov sounds." This pioneering approach to assessing extremity perfusion was the precursor to the modern-day ankle-brachial and injured extremity indices, and it initiated the quantitative assessment of the compensatory ability of the vascular system to restore circulation following axial artery ligation. Because of high thrombosis rates following direct vessel repair during his day, he proposed use of pharmacologic substances such as digitalis and amyl nitrite to improve extremity perfusion. As evidence of his innovative nature, Korotkov even proposed the use of "oxygenated nutrient solutions" in the future to improve extremity circulation. More than 100 years after his work, as continuous wave Doppler ultrasound, contrast angiography, and computed tomography are ubiquitous as diagnostic tools, the practice of surgery would be well served to recall Korotkov's foundational work and the rule of thumb for any physician: examine the patient.

Trauma is a leading cause of death in both military and civilian populations worldwide. Although medical advances have improved the overall morbidity and mortality often associated with trauma, additional research and innovative advancements in therapeutic interventions are needed to optimize patient outcomes. Cell-based therapies present a novel opportunity to improve trauma and critical care at both the acute and chronic phases that often follow injury. Although this field is still in its infancy, animal and human studies suggest that stem cells may hold great promise for the treatment of brain and spinal cord injuries, organ injuries, and extremity injuries such as those caused by orthopedic trauma, burns, and critical limb ischemia. However, barriers in the translation of cell therapies that include regulatory obstacles, challenges in manufacturing and clinical trial design, and a lack of funding are critical areas in need of development. In 2015, the Department of Defense Combat Casualty Care Research Program held a joint military–civilian meeting as part of its effort to inform the research community about this field and allow for effective planning and programmatic decisions regarding research and development. The objective of this article is to provide a “state of the science” review regarding cellular therapies in trauma and critical care, and to provide a foundation from which the potential of this emerging field can be harnessed to mitigate outcomes in critically ill trauma patients.

ObjectiveCare provided to a casualty in the prehospital combat setting can influence subsequent medical interactions and impact patient outcomes; therefore, we aimed to describe the incidence of specific prehospital interventions (lifesaving interventions (LSIs)) performed during the resuscitation and transport of combat casualties.MethodsWe performed a prospective observational, IRB approved study between November 2009 and March 2014. Casualties were enrolled as they were cared for at nine U.S. military medical facilities in Afghanistan. Data were collected using a standardized collection form. Determination if a prehospital intervention was performed correctly, performed incorrectly, or was necessary but was not performed (missed LSIs) was made by the receiving facility’s medical provider.ResultsTwo thousand one hundred and six patients met inclusion criteria. The mean age was 25 years and 98% were male. The most common mechanism of injury was explosion 57%. There were 236 airway interventions attempted, 183 chest procedures, 1,673 hemorrhage control, 1,698 vascular access, and 1,066 hypothermia preventions implemented. There were 142 incorrectly performed interventions and 360 were missed.ConclusionsIn our study, the most commonly performed prehospital LSI in a combat setting were for vascular access and hemorrhage control. The most common incorrectly performed and missed interventions were airway interventions and chest procedures respectively.

Background Attendance by military medical personnel (MMP) at scientific meetings (SMs) of civilian associations has been centrally managed since 2012. We aimed to document the importance of civilian-military interaction to and the impact of this change on combat casualty care (CCC) research. Methods (1) We identified 25 clinically significant CCC articles published by MMP between 2005 and 2014; we determined whether these articles were preceded by presentation by MMP at an SM. (2) We examined the changing civilian-military mix of publications on "damage control resuscitation" (DCR). (3) We analyzed the number of presentations by MMP each year at the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma. (4) We reviewed whether past presidents of the AAST (for 1992-2014) had military experience. Results (1) Ninety-two percent of the CCC articles were previously presented at an SM; 66% were presented at civilian association venues such as AAST. (2) DCR was first described in 2006; the civilian-military mix of publications rose steadily from 0 in 2006 to 80% in 2014. (3) The number of MMP oral presentations at AAST peaked during 2005 to 2007 and has declined to one to two per year since 2012. (4) Thirty-three percent of recent AAST presidents had military experience, versus 100% for the previous era. Conclusion Recent conflicts led to intense civilian-military collaboration in CCC research and to the spread of ideas such as DCR from military to civilian care. However, long-term trends (e.g., declining rates of military service nationally) place such collaboration at risk. Vigorous efforts to foster the vital civilian-military link in CCC are needed.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is used to mitigate bleeding and sustain central aortic pressure in the setting of shock. The ER-REBOA™ catheter is a new REBOA technology, previously reported only in the setting of civilian trauma and injury care. The use of REBOA in an out-of-hospital setting has not been reported, to our knowledge.We present a case series of wartime injured patients cared for by a US Air Force Special Operations Surgical Team at an austere location fewer than 3km (5-10 minutes' transport) from point of injury and 2 hours from the next highest environment of care-a Role 2 equivalent.In a 2-month period, four patients presented with torso gunshot or fragmentation wounds, hemoperitoneum, and class IV shock. Hand-held ultrasound was used to diagnose hemoperitoneum and facilitate 7Fr femoral sheath access. ER-REBOA balloons were positioned and inflated in the aorta (zone 1 [n = 3] and zone 3 [n = 1]) without radiography. In all cases, REBOA resulted in immediate normalization of blood pressure and allowed induction of anesthesia, initiation of whole-blood transfusion, damage control laparotomy, and attainment of surgical hemostasis (range of inflation time, 18-65 minutes). There were no access- or REBOArelated complications and all patients survived to achieve transport to the next echelon of care in stable condition.To our knowledge, this is the first series to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of REBOA in modern combat casualty care and the first to describe use of the ER-REBOA catheter. Use of this device by nonsurgeons and surgeons not specially trained in vascular surgery in the out-of-hospital setting is useful as a stabilizing and damage control adjunct, allowing time for resuscitation, laparotomy, and surgical hemostasis.

BACKGROUND The Senior Visiting Surgeon (SVS) program at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center (LRMC), Germany, was developed during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as a measure to build military-civilian interaction in trauma care and research. The objective of this study was to provide a summary of the program including workload and experiences. An additional objective was to identify factors needed for sustainment of this program during an interwar period. METHODS An electronic, 34-question survey was distributed to 192 surgeons who participated in the SVS program at LRMC, either through the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma or the Society of Vascular Surgery between 2005 and 2012. The survey was composed of multiple-choice and open-ended questions. RESULTS The response rate was 61% (n = 118), with 24% (n = 28) indicating previous military service. These 117 respondents provided 24.5 months of volunteer coverage at LRMC, with 22% (n = 26) performing multiple, 2-week rotations. Visiting surgeons participated in two to five operative cases per week, with the majority of operations related to the management of soft tissue wounds and burns followed by abdominal and vascular procedures, conducted daily multidisciplinary intensive care unit rounds, and collaborated with military surgeons in research projects resulting in 22 publications. More than half (n = 59) of the respondents maintained contact with military colleagues during the 12 months following the rotation. The majority of surveyed surgeons support continuation of the SVS at military facilities in the United States and hosting military surgeons at their civilian trauma center. CONCLUSION This study is the first to quantify the SVS program during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Visiting surgeons provided more than 2 years of combat casualty care during these, the longest wars in US history. Continuation of this program will require expanded military-civilian interaction in trauma care, training, and research during any interwar period.

In a letter dated February 5, 1676 (dated 1675 using the Julian calendar), Sir Isaac Newton opined to Robert Hooke, If I have seen further [than you and Descartes], it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. 1 That comment is frequently cited by physicians and surgeons who wish to recognize the debt owed to our predecessors whose efforts have brought us to our present state of enlightenment and understanding of the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of surgical disease. Many surgical greats were available for selection as the surgical giants for this supplement of the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. The four selected giants, whose contributions have had major influence on the organization and delivery of combat casualty care, were involved in wars of the early and mid-19th century (William Beaumont and Jonathan Letterman, respectively) and the twoworldwars of the 20th century (George Crile,World War I, and Edward D. Churchill, World War II) (Fig. 1). Each of the four was an experienced clinical surgeon of his time, and each appreciated the importance of scientific study to advance surgical care and improve patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to analyze demographic, epidemiologic, temporal, and outcome data from an integrated trauma registry of patients undergoing initial stabilization and transfer within a mature domestic trauma network; compare data with a companion subset from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry. Texas Trauma Service Area-P is composed of 25 counties, 15 rural Level IV trauma centers (no acute care surgery), and two Level I trauma centers. METHODS: This study has a retrospective cohort design. We hypothesize that Injury Severity Scores (ISSs), time intervals, and other clinical indicators would be complimentary to contemporary combat casualties. Inclusion criteria include age 18 years to 80 years, transferred from Level IV to Level I trauma center, or expired en route. RESULTS: A total of 543 subjects (84%) met the criteria and were analyzed. Averages and confidence intervals were as follows: age of 40 years (38Y41 years), males at 81%, ISS of 10 (10Y11), intensive care unit stay of 2 days (1Y3 days), and hospital stay of 5d ays (4Y6 days). Mechanisms of injury were as follows: penetrating (15%), blunt weapon (19%), stabs (9%), burns (5%), and gunshots (5%). Eight percent received blood within the first 24 hours. Survival was at 98%. Time intervals (95% confidence interval) were as follows: prehospital at 1:43 (1:29Y1:58), Level IV dwell time at 3:17 (3:06Y3:28), interfacility transfer at 1:43 (1:36Y1:49), and total at 6:39 (6:20Y6:58). RemTORN cases were older, spent longer time en route to Level I, and had ISS similar to combat casualties. Rates of blood transfusion in the first 24 hours and survival were similar in order of magnitude. CONCLUSION: The RemTORN platform is operational. Demographic, epidemiologic, and temporal characteristics as observed will support clinical investigations of traumatic coagulopathy, shock, and potential interventions before Level I arrival. Results of such investigations will likely be applicable to the contemporary and future battlefield. (J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;75: S164YS168. Copyright * 2013 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins) LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and epidemiologic study, level III.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage following traumatic injury is a leading cause of military and civilian mortality. Noncompressible torso hemorrhage (NCTH) has been identified as particularly lethal, especially in the prehospital setting.METHODS: All patients sustaining NCTH between August 2002 and July 2012 were identified from the UK Joint Theatre Trauma Registry. NCTH was defined as injury to a named torso axial vessel, pulmonary injury, solid-organ injury (Grade 4 or greater injury to the liver, kidney, or spleen) or pelvic fracture with ring disruption. Patients with ongoing hemorrhage were identified using either a systolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg or the need for immediate surgical hemorrhage control. Data on injury pattern and location as well as cause of death were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses.RESULTS: During 10 years, 296 patients were identified with NCTH, with a mortality of 85.5%. The majority of deaths occurred before hospital admission (n = 222, 75.0%). Of patients admitted to hospital, survivors (n = 43, 14.5%) had a higher median systolic blood pressure (108 [43] vs. 89 [46], p = 0.123) and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) (14 [12] vs. 3 [0], p < 0.001) compared with in-hospital deaths (n = 31, 10.5%). Hemorrhage was the more common cause of death (60.1%), followed by central nervous system disruption (30.8%), total body disruption (5.1%), and multiple-organ failure (4.0%). On multivariate analysis, major arterial and pulmonary hilar injury are most lethal with odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of 16.44 (5.50-49.11) and 9.61 (1.06-87.00), respectively.CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the majority of patients sustaining NCTH die before hospital admission, with exsanguination and central nervous system disruption contributing to the bulk cause of death. Major arterial and pulmonary hilar injuries are independent predictors of mortality. (J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013; 75: S263YS268. Copyright (C) 2013 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins)

Vladimir A. Oppel (1872-1932) was a forefather of military trauma systems. As a surgeon in the Russian Army in World War I, Oppel experienced the challenges and inefficiencies associated with caring for large numbers of combat wounded, the inefficiencies he observed leading to unacceptable morbidity and mortality. As a consequence, Oppel envisioned a coordinated sequence of surgical care on the battlefield and developed the concept of targeted evacuation. In his work, Oppelwas among the first to propose the right operation for the right patient at the right location at the right time. Central to Oppel s precepts were (1) the forward positioning of surgical care close to the point of injury, (2) the development of a reserve of proficient and deployable military surgeons, and (3) the provision of specialized surgery to optimize survival and reduce morbidity. Oppel s teachings were validated during World War II in the performance of the Soviet casualty evacuation system and in all modern wars modern since. Today, nearly 100 years after the work of Vladimir Oppel, the benefits of a coordinated or targeted trauma system, working to optimize survival after trauma, are well recognized around the world.

BACKGROUND: Noncompressible torso hemorrhage (NCTH) is the leading cause of potentially survivable trauma in the battlefield and has recently been defined using anatomic and physiologic criteria. The objective of this study was to characterize the frequency and mortality in combat of NCTH using a contemporary definition. METHODS: Four categories of torso injury, each based on vascular disruption, were identified in US military casualties from the Department of Defense Trauma Registry (2002-2010): (1) thoracic, including lung; (2) solid organ (high-grade spleen, liver, and kidney); (3) named axial vessel; and (4) pelvic fracture with ring disruption. Injuries within these categories were evaluated in the context of physiologic indicator of shock and/or the need for operative hemorrhage control. RESULTS: Of 15,209 battle injuries sustained during the study period, 12.7% (n = 1,936) had sustained one or more categories of torso injury. Of these, 331 (17.1%) had evidence of shock or the need for urgent hemorrhage control, with a mean (SD) Injury Severity Score (ISS) and mortality rate of 30 (13) and 18.7%, respectively. Pulmonary injuries were most numerous (41.7%), followed by solid-organ (29.3%), vascular (25.7%), and pelvic (15.1%) injuries. Following multivariate analysis, the most mortal injury complexes were identified as major arterial injury (odds ratio, 3.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-9.74) and pulmonary injury (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-4.98). CONCLUSION: NCTH can be defined using anatomic parameters combined with physiologic and operative interventions suggestive of hemorrhage. Major arterial and pulmonary injuries contribute most significantly to the mortality burden. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic/prognostic study, level III. Language: en

Background Junctional extremity and noncompressible hemorrhage are difficult challenges facing the prehospital provider on the battlefield. The subset of casualties with pelvic or truncal vascular injury represents a challenge in hemorrhage control. Methods The Armed Forces Medical Examiner (AFME) System was queried for nonsurvivors with significant vascular injuries and an associated pelvic fracture. A panel of military experts in prehospital care, vascular surgery, and orthopaedic surgery reviewed all records. Zones of hemorrhage were categorized as Zone I, area of injury allowing tourniquet use; Zone II, area of injury compressible but not allowing tourniquet use; or Zone III, noncompressible. Currently available and emerging technologies for hemorrhage control were reviewed and potential applicability of each modality determined. Results An AFME database search yielded 49 nonsurvivors with pelvic fractures and associated vascular injuries. Zone I hemorrhage injuries were present in 21% of patients, Zone II in 19%, and Zone III in 60%, accounting for 115 total injuries. Thirty percent (n=15) of patients had uncontrollable hemorrhage, 39% (n=19) had hemorrhage potentially controllable by the battlefield prehospital provider, and 30% (n=15) were deemed compressible with emerging technologies not available on the battlefield. Sixty-one percent (n=30) had vascular injuries that were noncompressible using battlefield-available methods. Conclusions The majority of battlefield vascular injuries in nonsurvivors were not controllable using technology available to the prehospital responder. Classifying battlefield hemorrhage into zones of hemorrhage may allow us to focus future research and intervention development.

The battlefield has seen tremendous revolutions in military medical affairs (RMMAs) as a result of the last decade of continuous combat operations. The advances in deployed and en route combat casualty care are categorized as individual RMMAs shown in Table 1. As with prehospital advances, the basis for many of the RMMAs in the deployed hospital care environment as well as en route care was translated from civilian trauma practice but is realistic and relevant to the battlefield context. As the conflict evolved, the substantive data from the battlefield led to many new paradigms of treatment and evacuation. The successful implementation of many of these battlefield practices was then effectively translated back into the civilian injury care environment as has been typical of medical advances developed subsequent to previous conflicts of antiquity. The RMMAs that occurred during the last 10 years of combat casualty care are in the realm of deployed hospital care and en route care and are discussed in detail in this article.

BACKGROUND: Critical evaluation of all aspects of combat casualty care, including mortality, with a special focus on the incidence and causes of potentially preventable deaths among US combat fatalities, is central to identifying gaps in knowledge, training, equipment, and execution of battlefield trauma care. The impetus to produce this analysis was to develop a comprehensive perspective of battlefield death, concentrating on deaths that occurred in the preYmedical treatment facility (pre-MTF) environment. METHODS: The Armed Forces Medical Examiner Service Mortality Surveillance Division was used to identify Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom combat casualties from October 2001 to June 2011 who died from injury in the deployed environment. The autopsy records, perimortem records, photographs on file, and Mortality Trauma Registry of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner Service were used to compile mechanism of injury, cause of injury, medical intervention performed, Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score, and Injury Severity Score (ISS) on all lethal injuries. All data were used by the expert panel for the conduct of the potential for injury survivability assessment of this study. RESULTS: For the study interval between October 2001 and June 2011, 4,596 battlefield fatalities were reviewed and analyzed. The stratification of mortality demonstrated that 87.3% of all injury mortality occurred in the pre-MTF environment. Of the pre-MTF deaths, 75.7% (n = 3,040) were classified as nonsurvivable, and 24.3% (n = 976) were deemed potentially survivable (PS). The injury/physiologic focus of PS acute mortality was largely associated with hemorrhage (90.9%). The site of lethal hemorrhage was truncal (67.3%), followed by junctional (19.2%) and peripheral-extremity (13.5%) hemorrhage. CONCLUSION: Most battlefield casualties died of their injuries before ever reaching a surgeon. As most pre-MTF deaths are nonsurvivable, mitigation strategies to impact outcomes in this population need to be directed toward injury prevention. To significantly impact the outcome of combat casualties with PS injury, strategies must be developed to mitigate hemorrhage and optimize airway management or reduce the time interval between the battlefield point of injury and surgical intervention. Understanding battlefield mortality is a vital component of the military trauma system. Emphasis on this analysis should be placed on trauma system optimization, evidence-based improvements in Tactical Combat Casualty Care guidelines, data-driven research, and development to remediate gaps in care and relevant training and equipment enhancements that will increase the survivability of the fighting force. (J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73: S431YS437. Copyright * 2012 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins)

After trauma, compartment syndrome of the extremities is a common, disabling, and-if managed suboptimally-lethal problem. Its treatment by surgical fasciotomy continues to be useful but controversial. The purpose of this survey is to measure survival and fasciotomy in a large trauma system to characterize trends and to determine if fasciotomy is associated with improved survival.We retrospectively surveyed data from a military trauma registry for U.S. casualties from 2001 to 2010. Casualties had extremity injury or extremity fasciotomy. We associated survival and fasciotomy.Of 17,166 casualties in the total study, 19% (3,313) had fasciotomy and 2.8% (481) had compartment syndrome. Annual fasciotomy rates started at 0% (2001) and rose to 26% (2010). For all casualties, the survival rate initially was high (100%) but decreased steadily until its nadir (96.4%) in 2005. Thereafter, it increased to make a V-shaped trend with reversal occurring after fielding two interventions within the trauma system specifically for casualties at risk for fasciotomy-tourniquet use and a fasciotomy education program.Over a decade of war, the survival rate of extremity injured casualties was associated with two trauma system interventions-tourniquet usage and a fasciotomy education program. The current example of measuring implementation of initiatives may be useful as a model for future attempted improvements in health care.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: In a combat environment, major vascular trauma endures as the leading cause of death. The Dutch role 2 Medical Treatment Facility (MTF), provided supportive care during the mission in Uruzgan, Afghanistan. Aim of this study was to conduct detailed analysis of the admitted major haemorrhages (vascular injuries) and to compare our findings with NATO coalition partners. METHODS: Retrospective, descriptive study. Participants eligible for this study came from the role 2 MTF admission database, where they fitted the criteria 'Major haemorrhage (class 2 haemorrhage or more according to the ATLS((R)) classification) between 2006 and 2010'. Results were contrasted with studies from coalition partners. RESULTS: The query revealed 194 casualties sustaining 208 central (60% abdominal, 40% thoracic/neck), and 99 extremity major haemorrhages leading to 1.6 major haemorrhages per casualty. Survival was significantly better (p

OBJECTIVE: Hundreds of general surgeons from the army, navy, and air force have been deployed during the past 10 years to support combat forces, but little data exist on their preparedness to handle the challenging injuries that they are currently encountering. Our objective was to assess operative and operational experience in theater with the goal of improving combat readiness among surgeons. METHODS: A detailed survey was sent to 246 active duty surgeons from the army, navy, and air force who have been deployed at least once in the past 10 years, requesting information on cases performed, perceptions of efficacy of pre-deployment training, knowledge deficits, and post-deployment emotional challenges. Survey data were kept confidential and analyzed using standard statistical methods. RESULTS: Of 246 individuals, 137 (56%) responded and 93 (68%) have been deployed two or more times. More than 18,500 operative procedures were reported, with abdominal and soft tissue cases predominating. Many surgeons identified knowledge or practice gaps in pre-deployment vascular (46%), neurosurgical (29.9%), and orthopedic (28.5%) training. The personal burden of deployment manifested itself with both family (approximately 10% deployment-related divorce rate) and personal (37 surgeons [27%] with two or more symptoms of posttraumatic stress syndrome) stressors. CONCLUSION: These data support modifications of pre-deployment combat surgical training to include increased exposure to open vascular procedures and curriculum traditionally outside general surgery (neurosurgery and orthopedics). The acute care surgical model may be ideal for the military surgeon preparing for deployment. Further research should be directed toward identifying factors contributing to psychological stress among military medics.

BACKGROUND: The died of wounds (DOW) rate is cited as a measure of combat casualty care effectiveness without the context of injury severity or insight into lethality of the battlefield. The objective of this study was to characterize injury severity and other factors related to variations in the DOW rate. METHODS: The highest monthly DOW (HDOW) and lowest monthly DOW (LDOW) rates from 2004 to 2008 were identified from analysis and casualty report databases and used to direct a search of the Joint Theater Trauma Registry. Casualties from the HDOW and LDOW were combined into cohorts, and injury data were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: The HDOW rates were 13.4%, 11.6%, and 12.8% (mean, 12.6%), and the LDOW rates were 1.3%, 2.0%, and 2.7% (mean, 2.0%) ( p 0.0001). The HDOW (n 541) and LDOW (n 349) groups sustained a total of 1,154 wounds. Injury Severity Score was greater in the HDOW than the LDOW group (mean [SD], 11.1 [0.53] vs. 9.4 [0.58]; p 0.03) as was the percentage of patients with Injury Severity Score of more than 25 (HDOW, 12% vs. LDOW, 7.7%; p 0.04). Excluding minor injuries (Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 1), there was a greater percentage of chest injuries in the HDOW compared with the LDOW group (16.5% vs. 11.2%, p 0.03). Explosive mechanisms were more commonly the cause of injury in the HDOW group (58.7% vs. 49.7%; p 0.007), which also had a higher percentage of Marine Corps personnel (p 0.02). CONCLUSION: This study provides novel data demonstrating that the died of wounds rate ranges significantly throughout the course of combat. Discernible differences in injury severity, wounding patterns, and even service affiliation exist within this variation. For accuracy, the died of wounds rate should be cited only in the context of associated injury patterns, injury severity, and mechanisms of injury. Without this context, DOW should not be used as a comparative medical metric.

Trauma resulting in hemorrhage from vascular disruption within the torso is a challenging scenario, with a propensity to be lethal in the first hour following trauma. The term noncompressible torso hemorrhage (NCTH) was only recently coined as part of contemporary studies describing the epidemiology of wounding during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. This article provides a contemporary review of NCTH, including a unifying definition to promote future study as well as a description of resuscitative and operative management strategies to be used in this setting, and sets a course for research to improve mortality following this vexing injury pattern.

Battlefield care given to a casualty before hospital arrival impacts clinical outcomes. To date, the published data regarding care given in the prehospital setting of a combat zone are limited. The purpose of this study was to describe the incidence and efficacy of specific prehospital lifesaving interventions (LSIs; interventions that could affect the outcome of the casualty), consistent with the Tactical Combat Casualty Care paradigm, performed during the resuscitation of casualties in a combat zone.We performed a prospective observational study between November 2009 and November 2011. Casualties were enrolled as they were treated at six US surgical facilities in Afghanistan. Descriptive data were collected on a standardized data collection form and included mechanism of injury, airway management, chest and hemorrhage interventions, vascular access, type of fluid administered, and hypothermia prevention. On arrival to the military hospital, the treating physician determined whether an intervention was performed correctly and whether an intervention was not performed that should have been performed (missed LSI).A total of 1,003 patients met the inclusion criteria. Their mean (SD) age was 25 (8.5) years and 97% were male. The mechanism of injury was explosion in 60% of patients, penetrating in 24% of patients, blunt in 15% of patients, and burn in 0.8% of patients. The most commonly performed LSIs included hemorrhage control (n = 599), hypothermia prevention (n = 429), and vascular access (n = 388). Of the missed LSIs, 252 were identified with the highest percentage of missed opportunities being composed of endotracheal intubation, chest needle decompression, and hypotensive resuscitation. In contrast, tourniquet application had the lowest percentage of missed opportunities.In our prospective study of prehospital LSIs performed in a combat zone, we observed a higher rate of incorrectly performed and missed LSIs in airway and chest (breathing) interventions than hemorrhage control interventions. The most commonly performed LSIs had lower incorrect and missed LSI rates.

As part of the 2011 American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) meeting in Chicago, the Military Liaison Committee led an interactive, case-based debate of vascular trauma and hemorrhage control entitled Tourniquets, Vascular Shunts and Endovascular Technologies: Esoteric or Essential? During the panel session, use of a real-time audience response system resulted in a sensing session during- which opinions and practice patterns related to these topics were tabulated. The purpose of this report is to provide the results from the audience response system gathered during this session as well as select peer-reviewed publications cited during the presentation of each scenario. In addition, the objective of this summary is to provide a perspective as to whether these surgical adjuncts or techniques are esoteric or essential in contemporary trauma practice.

Background: Blood vessel trauma leading to hemorrhage or ischemia presents a significant cause of morbidity and mortality after battlefield injury. The objective of this study is to characterize the epidemiology of vascular injury in the wars of Iraq and Afghanistan, including categorization of anatomic patterns, mechanism, and management of casualties. Methods: The Joint Theater Trauma Registry was interrogated (2002‐2009) for vascular injury in US troops to identify specific injury (group 1) and operative intervention (group 2) groups. Battle-related injuries (nonreturn to duty) were used as the denominator to establish injury rates. Mechanism of injurywascomparedbetweentheatersofwarandthemanagementstrategiesof ligation versus revascularization (repair and interposition grafting) reported. Results: Group 1 included 1570 Troops injured in Iraq (OIF) (n = 1390) and Afghanistan (OEF) (n= 180). Mechanism included explosive (73%), gunshot (27%), and other (

The Prehospital Fluid Conference was sponsored by the US Army Institute of Surgical Research and Combat Casualty Care Research, US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command. Some 65 conferees were invited in January 2010 to review the contemporary guidelines on the use of fluid resuscitation in treating combat casualties, discuss the state of the art of fluid resuscitation for combat casualties, and answer the following questions: - Are current Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) intravenous (IV) fluid resuscitation guidelines optimal for today? - Which IV fluid should be the top priority for future research? - What are the current indications for fluid resuscitation in the combat trauma patient? - What is the current practice in tactical fluid resuscitation? The objective of this conference was to identify the fluid to be used by the prehospital provider and not to address the needs once definitive hemorrhage control has been achieved. The fluids to be used are those that will be carried into the field on the back of the combat medic or in the vehicle used to transport the medic or the patient (echelon 1 care). There are several definitions of these echelons of care (North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO], European forces, etc.). The definitions used in this document are those of the Joint Theater Trauma System. The use of role and echelon can be interchangeable depending on the country of origin, but the terms can vary significantly. Echelon, as used in many/most of Joint Theater Trauma System presentations will be used throughout this document to indicate a level of care facility (see Table 1). Although discussions focused on military needs, it was understood and accepted by the consensus group that many, if not all, of the recommendations could and would be used for civilian prehospital providers with appropriate situational modifications.

Far removed from modern perceptions of cosmetic surgery, plastic and craniofacial surgery largely began centuries ago with efforts to redeem the destruction and loss from battlefield violence. Successive generations of surgeons responding with compassion to the functional and aesthetic loss of those wounded in war have achieved the progress that benefits 21st century patients. Although the historic role of war has to a degree been supplanted by jet travel, electronic communications, and academic medical centers, leadership continues to be the primary force responsible for advances. This article outlines the evolution of modern craniofacial surgery in 4 phases described by the Latin terms pluresartes, plurestelae, pluraloca, and pluresfontes.

Background Historic improvements in operative trauma care have been driven by war. It is unknown whether recent battlefield innovations stemming from conflicts in Iraq/Afghanistan will follow a similar trend. The objective of this study was to survey trauma medical directors (TMDs) at level 1–3 trauma centers across the United States and gauge the extent to which battlefield innovations have shaped civilian practice in 4 key domains of trauma care. Methods Domains were determined by the use of a modified Delphi method based on multiple consultations with an expert physician/surgeon panel: (1) damage control resuscitation (DCR), (2) tourniquet use, (3) use of hemostatic agents, and (4) prehospital interventions, including intraosseous catheter access and needle thoracostomy. A corresponding 47-item electronic anonymous survey was developed/pilot tested before dissemination to all identifiable TMD at level 1–3 trauma centers across the US. Results A total of 245 TMDs, representing nearly 40% of trauma centers in the United States, completed and returned the survey. More than half (n = 127; 51.8%) were verified by the American College of Surgeons. TMDs reported high civilian use of DCR: 95.1% of trauma centers had implemented massive transfusion protocols and the majority (67.7%) tended toward 1:1:1 packed red blood cell/fresh-frozen plasma/platelets ratios. For the other 3, mixed adoption corresponded to expressed concerns regarding the extent of concomitant civilian research to support military research and experience. In centers in which policies reflecting battlefield innovations were in use, previous military experience frequently was acknowledged. Conclusion This national survey of TMDs suggests that military data supporting DCR has altered civilian practice. Perceived relevance in other domains was less clear. Civilian academic efforts are needed to further research and enhance understandings that foster improved trauma surgeon awareness of military-to-civilian translation.

Heretofore, those wounded in combat who arrived at a deployed medical treatment facility with signs of life and subsequently died have been designated as having died of wounds, with the vast majority classified as dying due to hemorrhage from nondescript hemorrhagic shock.1 4 In the future, the development and use of new technology may offer the greatest potential for decreasing mortality among these patients in the deployed setting. A subset of patients who pose a particularly vexing challenge to combat medics, emergency physicians, and surgeons are those who are severely hypotensive and/or pulseless on arrival, but who are able to be resuscitated to the point of clinical hemostasis and seemingly viable physiology only to eventually regress to cardiovascular collapse and death. These patients for all intent and purposes meet the definition of exsanguination, 5,6 and to improve survival, their condition must be more fully described and better understood. The objective of this commentary is to re-introduce the term exsanguination shock and to provide a rudimentary characterization of this condition in combat casualty care.