1. |
- Coccolini, F., et al.
(author)
-
Aortic balloon occlusion (REBOA) in pelvic ring injuries: preliminary results of the ABO Trauma Registry
- 2020
-
In: Updates in Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2038-131X .- 2038-3312. ; 2020:72, s. 527-536
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- EndoVascular and Hybrid Trauma Management (EVTM) has been recently introduced in the treatment of severe pelvic ring injuries. This multimodal method of hemorrhage management counts on several strategies such as the REBOA (resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta). Few data exist on the use of REBOA in patients with a severely injured pelvic ring. The ABO (aortic balloon occlusion) Trauma Registry is designed to capture data for all trauma patients in hemorrhagic shock where management includes REBOA placement. Among all patients included in the ABO registry, 72 patients presented with severe pelvic injuries and were the population under exam. 66.7% were male. Mean and median ISS were respectively 43 and 41 (SD ± 13). Isolated pelvic injuries were observed in 12 patients (16.7%). Blunt trauma occurred in 68 patients (94.4%), penetrating in 2 (2.8%) and combined in 2 (2.8%). Type of injury: fall from height in 15 patients (23.1%), traffic accident in 49 patients (75.4%), and unspecified impact in 1 patient (1.5%). Femoral access was gained pre-hospital in 1 patient, in emergency room in 43, in operating room in 12 and in angio-suite in 16. REBOA was positioned in zone 1 in 59 patients (81,9%), in zone 2 in 1 (1,4%) and in zone 3 in 12 (16,7%). Aortic occlusion was partial/periodical in 35 patients (48,6%) and total occlusion in 37 patients (51,4%). REBOA associated morbidity rate: 11.1%. Overall mortality rate was 54.2% and early mortality rate (≤ 24h) was 44.4%. In the univariate analysis, factors related to early mortality (≤ 24h) are lower pH values (p = 0.03), higher base deficit (p = 0.021), longer INR (p = 0.012), minor increase in systolic blood pressure after the REBOA inflation (p = 0.03) and total aortic occlusion (p = 0.008). None of these values resulted significant in the multivariate analysis. In severe hemodynamically unstable pelvic trauma management, REBOA is a viable option when utilized in experienced centers as a bridge to other treatments; its use might be, however, accompanied with severe-to-lethal complications. © 2020, Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).
|
|
2. |
- Manzano-Nunez, Ramiro, et al.
(author)
-
Outcomes and management approaches of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta based on the income of countries
- 2020
-
In: World Journal of Emergency Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1749-7922. ; 15:57
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- © 2020 The Author(s). Background: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) could provide a survival benefit to severely injured patients as it may improve their initial ability to survive the hemorrhagic shock. Although the evidence supporting the use of REBOA is not conclusive, its use has expanded worldwide. We aim to compare the management approaches and clinical outcomes of trauma patients treated with REBOA according to the countries' income based on the World Bank Country and Lending Groups. Methods: We used data from the AORTA (USA) and the ABOTrauma (multinational) registries. Patients were stratified into two groups: (1) high-income countries (HICs) and (2) low-to-middle income countries (LMICs). Propensity score matching extracted 1:1 matched pairs of subjects who were from an LMIC or a HIC based on age, gender, the presence of pupillary response on admission, impeding hypotension (SBP ≤ 80), trauma mechanism, ISS, the necessity of CPR on arrival, the location of REBOA insertion (emergency room or operating room) and the amount of PRBCs transfused in the first 24 h. Logistic regression (LR) was used to examine the association of LMICs and mortality. Results: A total of 817 trauma patients from 14 countries were included. Blind percutaneous approach and surgical cutdown were the preferred means of femoral cannulation in HICs and LIMCs, respectively. Patients from LMICs had a significantly higher occurrence of MODS and respiratory failure. LR showed no differences in mortality for LMICs when compared to HICs; neither in the non-matched cohort (OR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.36-1.09; p = 0.1) nor in the matched cohort (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 0.63-3,33; p = 0.3). Conclusion: There is considerable variation in the management practices of REBOA and the outcomes associated with this intervention between HICs and LMICs. Although we found significant differences in multiorgan and respiratory failure rates, there were no differences in the risk-adjusted odds of mortality between the groups analyzed. Trauma surgeons practicing REBOA around the world should joint efforts to standardize the practice of this endovascular technology worldwide.
|
|