Search

Objective: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been increasingly performed for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs). However, multiple randomized trials have failed to demonstrate a survival benefit compared with open aortic surgery. During a 12-year period, 100% of patients without a history of aneurysm surgery had undergone EVAR for a rAAA at orebro University Hospital, with no emergent open aortic surgery performed. In the present study, we evaluated the mortality and technical success during this "EVAR-only" period. Methods: A single-center, retrospective observational study was conducted. We identified all patients who had presented to Orebro University Hospital with a rAAA between October 2009 and September 2021. Patients with isolated iliac artery, thoracic, and thoracoabdominal aortic ruptures were not included. Patients who had received previous aortic interventions (open or endovascular) and patients who had received palliative treatment instead of surgical intervention were also excluded. The patient characteristics, perioperative and postoperative data, and mortality rate were investigated. Results: EVAR had been performed in 100 patients. Preoperative hemodynamic instability had been present in 54 patients (54%), and 18 (18%) had undergone aortic balloon occlusion. The aneurysm location was infrarenal in 89 patients (89%). Bifurcated stent grafts had been used in 97 patients (97%), and adjunct endovascular techniques had been used for 27 patients (27%). Of 98 patients, EVAR had been performed with the patient under local anesthesia for 62 patients (63%). Peri-and postoperative complications at 30 days had occurred in 20 of 100 patients (20%) and 22 of 79 patients (28%), respectively. The overall mortality at 30 days was 27% (27 of 100 patients), and the mortality for those with an isolated infrarenal rAAA was 24% (21 of 89 patients). The overall mortality at 1 year was 39% (39 of 100 patients) and for those with an isolated infrarenal rAAA wa

BACKGROUND Hemorrhage from truncal and junctional injuries is responsible for the vast majority of potentially survivable deaths in combat casualties, causing most of its fatalities in the prehospital arena. Optimizing the deployment of the advanced bleeding control modalities required for the management of these injuries is essential to improve the survival of severely injured casualties. This study aimed to establish consensus on the optimal use and implementation of advanced bleeding control modalities in combat casualty care. METHODS A Delphi method consisting of three rounds was used. An international expert panel of military physicians was selected by the researchers to complete the Delphi surveys. Consensus was reached if 70% or greater of respondents agreed and if 70% or greater responded. RESULTS Thirty-two experts from 10 different nations commenced the process and reached consensus on which bleeding control modalities should be part of the standard equipment, that these modalities should be available at all levels of care, that only trained physicians should be allowed to apply invasive bleeding control modalities, but all medical and nonmedical personnel should be allowed to apply noninvasive bleeding control modalities, and on the training requirements for providers. Consensus was also reached on the necessity of international registries and guidelines, and on certain indications and contraindications for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in military environments. No consensus was reached on the role of a wound clamp in military settings and the indications for REBOA in patients with chest trauma, penetrating axillary injury or penetrating neck injury in combination with thoracoabdominal injuries. CONCLUSION Consensus was reached on the contents of a standard bleeding control toolbox, where it should be available, providers and training requirements, international registries

In recent years there has been a tremendous increase in hemorrhage control by endovascular methods. Traumatic and non-traumatic hemorrhage is being more frequently managed with endografts, embolization agents, and minimal invasive methods. These methods initially were used in hemodynamically stable patients only, whereas now these are being implemented in acute settings and hemodynamically unstable patients. The strategy of using endovascular and combined open-endo methods approach for hemodynamic instability in trauma and non-trauma patients has been named EVTM- EndoVascular resuscitation and Trauma Management. The EVTM concept will be presented in this article, describing how it is developed and used, as well as its limitations and future aspects.

Non-compressible torso hemorrhage (NCTH) (i.e. bleeding from anatomical locations not amenable to control by direct pressure or tourniquet application) is a leading cause of potentially preventable death after injury. In select trauma patients with infra-diaphragmatic NCTH-related hemorrhagic shock or traumatic circulatory arrest, occlusion of the aorta proximal to the site of hemorrhage may sustain or restore spontaneous circulation. While the traditional method of achieving proximal aortic occlusion included Emergency Department thoracotomy (EDT) with descending thoracic aortic cross-clamping, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) affords a less invasive option when thoracotomy is not required for other indications. In this article, we review the innovation, pathophysiologic effects, indications for, and technique of EDT and partial, intermittent, and complete REBOA in injured patients, including recommended methods for reversing aortic occlusion. We also discuss advantages and disadvantages of each of these methods of proximal aortic occlusion and review studies comparing their effectiveness and safety for managing post-injury NCTH. We conclude by providing recommendations as to when each of these methods may be best, when indicated, to manage injured patients with NCTH.