Search

Many countries are facing an aging population. As people live longer, surgeons face the prospect of operating on increasingly older patients. Traditional teaching is that with older age, these patients face an increased risk of mortality and morbidity, even to a level deemed too prohibitive for surgery. However, this is not always true. An active 90-year-old patient can be much fitter than an overweight, sedentary 65-year-old patient with comorbidities. Recent literature shows that frailty-an age-related cumulative decline in multiple physiological systems, is therefore a better predictor of mortality and morbidity than chronological age alone. Despite recognition of frailty as an important tool in identifying vulnerable surgical patients, many surgeons still shun objective tools. The aim of this position paper was to perform a review of the existing literature and to provide recommendations on emergency laparotomy and in frail patients. This position paper was reviewed by an international expert panel composed of 37 experts who were asked to critically revise the manuscript and position statements. The position paper was conducted according to the WSES methodology. We shall present the derived statements upon which a consensus was reached, specifying the quality of the supporting evidence and suggesting future research directions.

ObjectivesOur understanding of blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) has changed significantly in recent decades, resulting in a heterogeneous description of diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes in the literature which is not suitable for data pooling. Therefore, we endeavored to develop a core outcome set (COS) to help guide future BCVI research and overcome the challenge of heterogeneous outcomes reporting.MethodsAfter a review of landmark BCVI publications, content experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi study. For round 1, participants submitted a list of proposed core outcomes. In subsequent rounds, panelists used a 9-point Likert scale to score the proposed outcomes for importance. Core outcomes consensus was defined as >70% of scores receiving 7 to 9 and

BACKGROUND: In 2017, the World Society of Emergency Surgery published its guidelines for the management of adult and pediatric patients with splenic trauma. Several issues regarding the follow-up of patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM remained unsolved. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi method, we sought to explore ongoing areas of controversy in the NOM of splenic trauma and reach a consensus among a group of 48 international experts from five continents (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, America) concerning optimal follow-up strategies in patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on eleven clinical research questions and 28 recommendations with an agreement rate ≥ 80%. Mobilization after 24 h in low-grade splenic trauma patients (WSES Class I, AAST Grades I-II) was suggested, while in patients with high-grade splenic injuries (WSES Classes II-III, AAST Grades III-V), if no other contraindications to early mobilization exist, safe mobilization of the patient when three successive hemoglobins 8 h apart after the first are within 10% of each other was considered safe according to the panel. The panel suggests adult patients to be admitted to hospital for 1 day (for low-grade splenic injuries-WSES Class I, AAST Grades I-II) to 3 days (for high-grade splenic injuries-WSES Classes II-III, AAST Grades III-V), with those with high-grade injuries requiring admission to a monitored setting. In the absence of specific complications, the panel suggests DVT and VTE prophylaxis with LMWH to be started within 48-72 h from hospital admission. The panel suggests splenic artery embolization (SAE) as the first-line intervention in patients with hemodynamic stability and arterial blush on CT scan, irrespective of injury grade. Regarding patients with WSES Class II blunt splenic injuries (AAST Grade III) without contrast extravasation, a low threshold for SAE has been suggested in the presence of risk factors for NOM failure. The panel also suggested angiography and eventual SAE in all hemodynamically stable adult patients with WSES Class III injuries (AAST Grades IV-V), even in the absence of CT blush, especially when concomitant surgery that requires change of position is needed. Follow-up imaging with contrast-enhanced ultrasound/CT scan in 48-72 h post-admission of trauma in splenic injuries WSES Class II (AAST Grade III) or higher treated with NOM was considered the best strategy for timely detection of vascular complications. CONCLUSION: This consensus document could help guide future prospective studies aiming at validating the suggested strategies through the implementation of prospective trauma databases and the subsequent production of internationally endorsed guidelines on the issue.

BackgroundAttempts are made with emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) to salvage trauma patients who present to the hospital in extremis. The EDT allows for relief of cardiac tamponade, internal cardiac massage, and proximal hemorrhage control. Minimally invasive techniques, such as endovascular hemorrhage control (EHC) are available, but their noninferiority to EDT remains unproven. Before adopting EHC, it is important to evaluate the current outcomes of EDT. We hypothesized that EDT survival has improved during the last 4 decades, and outcomes stratified by pre-hospital CPR and injury patterns will provide benchmarks for success-to-rescue and survival outcomes for patients in extremis.Study designConsecutive trauma patients undergoing EDT from 1975 to 2014 were prospectively observed as part of quality improvement. Predicted probabilities of survival were adjusted for pre-hospital CPR, mechanism of injury, injury pattern, patient demographics, and time period of EDT using logistic regression. Success-to-rescue was defined as return of spontaneous circulation with blood pressure permissive for transfer to the operating room.ResultsThere were 1,708 EDTs included, with an overall 419 (24%) success-to-rescue patients and 106 survivors (6%), and 1,394 (79%) of these patients had pre-hospital CPR and 900 (54%) had penetrating wounds. The most common injury patterns were chest (29%), multisystem with head (27%), and multisystem without head (21%). Penetrating injury was associated with higher survival than blunt trauma (9% vs 3% p < 0.001). Success-to-rescue increased from 22% in 1975 to 1979 to 35% over the final 5 years (p < 0.001); survival increased from 5% to 14% (p < 0.001).ConclusionsOutcomes of EDT have improved over the past 40 years. In the last 5 years, STR was 35% and overall survival was 14%. These prospective observational data provide benchmarks to define the role of EHC as an alternative approach for patients arriving in extremis.

BackgroundMassive transfusion protocols (MTPs) have become standard of care in the management of bleeding injured patients, yet strategies to guide them vary widely. We conducted a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial (RCT) to test the hypothesis that an MTP goal directed by the viscoelastic assay thrombelastography (TEG) improves survival compared with an MTP guided by conventional coagulation assays (CCA).MethodsThis RCT enrolled injured patients from an academic level-1 trauma center meeting criteria for MTP activation. Upon MTP activation, patients were randomized to be managed either by an MTP goal directed by TEG or by CCA (ie, international normalized ratio, fibrinogen, platelet count). Primary outcome was 28-day survival.ResultsOne hundred eleven patients were included in an intent-to-treat analysis (TEG = 56, CCA = 55). Survival in the TEG group was significantly higher than the CCA group (log-rank P = 0.032, Wilcoxon P = 0.027); 20 deaths in the CCA group (36.4%) compared with 11 in the TEG group (19.6%) (P = 0.049). Most deaths occurred within the first 6 hours from arrival (21.8% CCA group vs 7.1% TEG group) (P = 0.032). CCA patients required similar number of red blood cell units as the TEG patients [CCA: 5.0 (2-11), TEG: 4.5 (2-8)] (P = 0.317), but more plasma units [CCA: 2.0 (0-4), TEG: 0.0 (0-3)] (P = 0.022), and more platelets units [CCA: 0.0 (0-1), TEG: 0.0 (0-0)] (P = 0.041) in the first 2 hours of resuscitation.ConclusionsUtilization of a goal-directed, TEG-guided MTP to resuscitate severely injured patients improves survival compared with an MTP guided by CCA and utilizes less plasma and platelet transfusions during the early phase of resuscitation.

BackgroundThe diagnosis of blunt abdominal trauma can be challenging and resource intensive. Observation with serial clinical assessments plays a major role in the evaluation of these patients, but the time required for intra-abdominal injury to become clinically apparent is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the amount of time required for an intra-abdominal injury to become clinically apparent after blunt abdominal trauma via physical examination or commonly followed clinical values.MethodsA retrospective review of patients who sustained blunt trauma resulting in intra-abdominal injury between June 2010 and June 2012 at a Level 1 academic trauma center was performed. Patient demographics, injuries, and the amount of time from emergency department admission to sign or symptom development and subsequent diagnosis were recorded. All diagnoses were made by computed tomography or at the time of surgery. Patient transfers from other hospitals were excluded.ResultsOf 3,574 blunt trauma patients admitted to the hospital, 285 (8%) experienced intra-abdominal injuries. The mean (SD) age was 36 (17) years, the majority were male (194 patients, 68%) and the mean (SD) Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 21 (14). The mean (SD) time from admission to diagnosis via computed tomography or surgery was 74 (55) minutes. Eighty patients (28%) required either surgery (78 patients, 17%) or radiographic embolization (2 patients, 0.7%) for their injury. All patients who required intervention demonstrated a sign or symptom of their intra-abdominal injury within 60 minutes of arrival, although two patients were intervened upon in a delayed fashion. All patients with a blunt intra-abdominal injury manifested a clinical sign or symptom of their intra-abdominal injury, resulting in their diagnosis within 8 hours 25 minutes of arrival to the hospital.ConclusionAll diagnosed intra-abdominal injuries from blunt trauma manifested clinical signs or symptoms that could prompt imaging or intervention, leading to their diagnosis within 8 hours 25 minutes of arrival to the hospital. All patients who required an intervention for their injury manifested a sign or symptom of their injury within 60 minutes of arrival.Level of evidenceTherapeutic study, level IV. Epidemiologic study, level III.

BackgroundThe optimal time to initiate venous thromboembolism pharmacoprophylaxis after blunt abdominal solid organ injury is unknown.MethodsPostinjury coagulation status was characterized using thromboelastography (TEG) in trauma patients with blunt abdominal solid organ injuries; TEG was divided into 12-hour intervals up to 72 hours.ResultsForty-two of 304 patients (13.8%) identified underwent multiple postinjury thromboelastographic studies. Age (P = .45), gender (P = .45), and solid organ injury grade (P = .71) were similar between TEG and non-TEG patients. TEG patients had higher Injury Severity Scores compared with non-TEG patients (33.2 vs 18.3, respectively, P < .01). Among the TEG patients, the shear elastic modulus strength and maximum amplitude values began in the normal range within the first 12-hour interval after injury, increased linearly, and crossed into the hypercoagulable range at 48 hours (15.1 ± 1.9 Kd/cs and 57.6 ± 1.6 mm, respectively; P < .01, analysis of variance).ConclusionsPatients sustaining blunt abdominal solid organ injuries transition to a hypercoagulable state approximately 48 hours after injury. In the absence of contraindications, pharmacoprophylaxis should be considered before this time for effective venous thromboembolism prevention.