Search

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.

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]

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: 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]