Search

Restoration of form and function after burn injury remains challenging, but emerging laser and pulsed light technologies now offer hope for patients with hypertrophic scars, which may be associated with persistent hyperemia, chronic folliculitis, intense pruritis, and neuropathic pain. In addition to impairing body image, these scars may limit functional recovery, compromise activities of daily living, and prevent return to work. Three different platforms are now poised to alter our reconstructive algorithm: (1) vascular-specific pulsed dye laser (PDL) to reduce hyperemia, (2) ablative fractional CO2 laser to improve texture and pliability of the burn scar, and (3) intense pulsed light (IPL) to correct burn scar dyschromia and alleviate chronic folliculitis. In this paper, we will provide an overview of our work in this area, which includes a systematic review, a retrospective analysis of our preliminary experience, and interim data from our on-going, prospective, before-after cohort trial. We will demonstrate that laser- and light-based therapies can be combined with each other safely to yield superior results, often at lower cost, by reducing the need for reconstructive surgery. Modulating the burn scar, through minimally invasive modalities, may replace conventional methods of burn scar excision and yield outcomes not previously possible or conceivable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On the morning of June 9, 2009, an explosion occurred at a manufacturing plant in Garner, North Carolina. By the end of the day, 68 injured patients had been evaluated at the 3 Level I trauma centers and 3 community hospitals in the Raleigh/Durham metro area (3 people who were buried in the structural collapse died at the scene). Approximately 300 employees were present at the time of the explosion, when natural gas being vented during the repair of a hot water heater ignited. The concussion from the explosion led to structural failure in multiple locations and breached additional natural gas, electrical, and ammonia lines that ran overhead in the 1-story concrete industrial plant. Intent is the major difference between this type of accident and a terrorist using an incendiary device to terrorize a targeted population. But while this disaster lacked intent, the response, rescue, and outcomes were improved as a result of bioterrorism preparedness. This article discusses how bioterrorism hospital preparedness planning, with an all-hazards approach, became the basis for coordinated burn surge disaster preparedness. This real-world disaster challenged a variety of systems, hospitals, and healthcare providers to work efficiently and effectively to manage multiple survivors. Burn-injured patients served as a focus for this work. We describe the response, rescue, and resuscitation provided by first responders and first receivers as well as efforts made to develop burn care capabilities and surge capacity.

Objective: To assess the impact of an independent call center on facilitation of burn and maxillofacial trauma patient transfer to a level 1 trauma center., Methods: All patients admitted to our level 1 trauma center for definitive management of either burn or maxillofacial injuries from September 1, 2004 to September 1, 2008, 2 years before and after transfer service initiation on September 1, 2006, were identified using the North Carolina Trauma Registry. Cohort demographics, referral patterns, transfer times/distances, and clinical outcomes were assessed., Results: Burn patients increased from 1031 to 1208, from the 2 years before to after transfer center initiation. Average transport time increased from 113 to 165 minutes and average distance traveled increased from 84 to 86 miles. Out-of-state admissions increased from 24 to 46; number of referring counties increased from 58 to 60. Maxillofacial trauma patients increased from 390 to 576. Average transport time increased from 87 to 119 minutes, average distance increased from 84 to 89 miles, and number of referring counties jumped from 28 to 43. Length of stay did not change over the study period., Conclusions: The initiation of an independent call center, designed to facilitate the transfer of patients with burn and maxillofacial injuries to a level 1 trauma center, increased the number of referrals and expanded our geographic footprint, but did not decrease transport times.

Purpose: This study evaluates how the transition from pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (pTRAM) to perforator flaps at an academic center has affected outcome and reimbursement., Methods: In 2006, our practice transitioned to almost exclusively perforator flaps for breast reconstruction. This study retrospectively compares pTRAM flaps performed from 2002 to 2006 (group 1) with perforator flaps from 2006 to 2010 (group 2). Operative time, complications, and reimbursement were compared between the 2 groups., Results: We performed 93 pTRAM flaps in 69 patients in group 1 and 102 perforator flaps in 69 patients in group 2. Operative time was shorter in group 1 for unilateral breast reconstruction (399 vs. 543 minutes, P = 0.0001), but no significant difference was noted for bilateral cases (547 vs. 658 minutes, P = 0.1). Fat necrosis requiring reoperation (23.7% vs. 5.9%, P = 0.0004) and partial flap necrosis (20.6% vs. 7.2%, P = 0.045) were more frequent in group 1. There was a higher frequency of abdominal hernia (8.8% vs. 1.6%, P = 0.2) but fewer hematomas (1.5% vs. 10%, P = 0.06) in group 1, although statistical significance was not reached between the 2 groups. Mean adjusted payment per case was $3658.67 for group 1 versus $5256.48 for group 2 (P = 0.004), whereas payment per minute was $9.25 for group 1 versus $9.13 for group 2 (P = 0.9). Perforator flaps appear to be as profitable as pTRAM flaps with lower morbidity., Conclusions: The transition from pTRAM to perforator flap can be done successfully with appropriate resources and support. The development of a perforator flap practice represents an opportunity cost in optimizing patient care and should be an option to patients seeking breast reconstruction.

Child abuse and neglect continue to account for a significant number of pediatric burn injuries. Although the epidemiology of intentional burn injuries has been studied, this report compares victims of abuse with victims of neglect. Furthermore, we investigate the long-term fate of both victim and perpetrator. A retrospective search of the North Carolina Jaycee Burn Center database identified 21 abuse and 21 neglect patients among 238 pediatric admissions (mean age, 5.4 years, mean surface area 14%) from 1992 to 1994. The medical, social, and legal records of each patients were examined by two independent reviewers. History, hospital course, and disposition were compared between groups by chi-square analysis and Student's t test. Compared with victims of neglect, abused children were slightly younger (2.1 vs 2.7 years), had somewhat larger burns (12.3% vs 9.05 total body surface area), had inconsistent mechanisms of injury (90% vs 33%, p < 0.002) that were bathroom related (81% vs 29%, p < 0.001), were likely to have a history of abuse (57% vs 24%, p < 0.05) or stigmata of abuse on exam (43% vs 14%, p < 0.05), had longer lengths of stay (23.8 vs 14.1 days, p < 0.05), had similar complication rates, and were place more often in foster care (65% vs 15%, p < 0.01). Inpatient mortality was 5%. Mean follow-up was 108 days, during which time two children were readmitted for repeat abuse. Regarding the caregivers, 57% were single mothers, 36% had been investigated for abuse or neglect, and 12% had lost custody of other children. Of the perpetrators involved in abuse, 71% were charged with a felony, 43% were convicted, and 19% were incarcerated longer than 30 days. Victims of burn abuse and neglect differ considerably in terms of history and disposition but not hospital course. Children in both groups, however, remain at risk for abuse and neglect after discharge. We recommend that more aggressive efforts be made to secure safe environments for these children and that the perpetrator, if clearly identified, be dealt with in a fashion to prevent recurrence of the offense.

Unlabelled: The low occurrence, nonspecific signs and symptoms, and high rate of associated morbidity and mortality of pulmonary embolus (PE) create major problems in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of PE. The purpose of this study was to analyze the frequency and outcome of PE in an entire state's trauma population using a large, population-based, hospital discharge data base. With the inclusion of an entire population, the reported incidence, high risk groups of patients, and specific risk factors regarding PE were assessed. A multivariate, logistic regression model was created from the data to determine predictive power of selected risk factors in patients at risk., Methods: The data source was a statewide, hospital discharge data base that includes data on all hospitalized patients for all of the hospitals in North Carolina. Data were available from 1988 to 1993. Using primary discharge diagnosis and nine additional ICD-9 coded diagnoses from the discharge abstract, patients were selected by presence of diagnostic codes for traumatic injury (800-959.9) and PE (415.1). Statistical analysis was performed using univariate and multivariate analysis to determine significant risk factors and to create a candidate model for the prediction of risk in the study population., Results: Of 318,554 patients, 952 (0.30%) had a recorded diagnosis of PE. The mortality rate for patients with PE (26%) was 10 times higher than the mortality rate in patients without PE (2.6%). In evaluating specific risk factors, age was a significant predictor of the risk of PE: 0.05% for patients under age 55 and 0.7% in those 55 years and over. The rate of PE, 0.3%, was low for the entire study population, but was highest in patients with injuries of the extremities, 0.53%. Increasing Injury Severity Score and Abbreviated Injury Scale score for determined body systems were also found to correlate with an increasing risk of PE. Over the course of the study, the incidence of PE among patients discharged from non-trauma centers showed a significant decrease. There was also a decrease in the mortality in non-trauma centers for PE. This finding cannot be due to coding changes coincident with the advent of diagnosis related groups because it would be associated with more vigorous combing of charts for diagnoses? It may well be that the use of prophylactic measures in injured patients initially used at trauma centers was adopted by the physicians at non-trauma centers over this time with the resultant decline in PE and associated mortality. From the univariate linear regression models, a logistic regression model was created that confirmed age as the most significant risk factor, followed by Injury Severity Score and Abbreviated Injury Scale score for soft tissue, extremity, and chest. The calculated area under the receiver operator characteristic curve was 0.72., Conclusion: Using a large, population-based data base, we were able to determine the reported incidence of PE among trauma patients and establish specific risk factors. The reported incidence of PE in this population is low, 0.30%. The mortality among those with PE, however, is significant at 26%. In this study, age, Injury Severity Score, and injury to specific body regions (soft tissue, extremity, chest) were associated with an increased risk of PE. The investigation of prophylaxis of PE and the general management of injured patients may be influenced by the overall low reported frequency of PE and the specific high risk populations described in this study. In light of the low incidence of PE in patients without specific risk factors, prophylactic interventions cannot be routinely recommended unless their benefits clearly outweigh their risks.