REBOA is a minimally invasive alternative to emergency department thoracotomy with aortic cross-clamp to temporize noncompressible torso hemorrhage and obtain proximal control in both traumatic and nontraumatic causes of hemorrhage. REBOA can also be used for more targeted AO in the distal aorta for pelvic, junctional, or extremity hemorrhage.

Therapeutic, level V.

No abstract

BACKGROUND Despite advances in management of extremity vascular injuries, “hard signs” remain the primary criterion to determine need for imaging and urgency of exploration. We propose that hard signs are outdated and that hemorrhagic and ischemic signs of vascular injury may be of greater clinical utility. METHODS Extremity arterial injuries from the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment registry were analyzed to examine the relationships between hard signs, ischemic signs, and hemorrhagic signs of extremity vascular injury with workup, diagnosis, and management. RESULTS Of 1,910 cases, 1,108 (58%) had hard signs of vascular injury. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) was more commonly used as the diagnostic modality in patients without hard signs, while operative exploration was primarily used for diagnosis in hard signs. Patients undergoing CTA were more likely to undergo endovascular or hybrid repair (EHR) (10.7%) compared with patients who underwent exploration for diagnosis (1.5%). Of 915 patients presenting with hemorrhagic signs, CTA was performed 14.5% of the time and was associated with a higher rate of EHR and observation. Of the 490 patients presenting with ischemic signs, CTA was performed 31.6% of the time and was associated with higher rates of EHR and observation. Hemorrhagic signs were associated with arterial transection, while ischemic signs were associated with arterial occlusion. Patients with ischemic signs undergoing exploration for diagnosis received more units of packed red blood cells during the first 24 hours. There was no difference in amputation rate, reintervention rate, hospital length of stay, or mortality in comparing groups who underwent CTA versus exploration. CONCLUSION Hard signs have limitations in identification and characterization of extremity arterial injuries. A strategy of using hemorrhagic and ischemic signs of vascular injury is of greater clinical utility. Further prospective study is needed to validate this proposed redefinition of categorization of presentations of extremity arterial injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic, level III.

No abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a recently active endovascular trauma service (ETS) on case volume and time to hemostasis, as a complement to an existing interventional radiology (IR) service. Summary Background Data: Endovascular techniques are vital for trauma care, but timely access can be a challenge. There is a paucity of data on the effect of a multispecialty team for delivery of endovascular hemorrhage control. Methods: The electronic medical record of trauma patients undergoing endovascular procedures between 2013 and 2018 was queried for provider type (IR or ETS). Case volume and rates were expressed per 100 monthly admissions, normalizing for seasonal variation. Interrupted time series analysis was used to model the case rate pre- and post-introduction of the ETS. Admission-to-procedure-time data were collected for pelvic angioembolization as a marker of patients requiring emergency hemostasis. Results: During 6 years, 1274 admission episodes required endovascular interventions. Overall case volume increased from 2.7 to 3.6 at a rate of 0.006 (P = 0.734) after introduction of the ETS. IR case volume decreased from 3.3 to 2.6 at a rate of 0.03 (P = 0.063). ETS case volume increased at a rate of 0.048 (P < 0.001), which was significantly different from the IR trend (P < 0.001). Median (interquartile range) time-to-procedure (hours) was significantly shorter for pelvic angioembolization [3.0 (4.4) vs 4.3 (3.6); P < 0.001] when ETS was compared to IR. Conclusion: A surgical ETS increases case volume and decreases time to hemostasis for trauma patients requiring time sensitive interventions. Further work is required to assess patient outcome following this change.

No abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2) during resuscitation of open-chest cardiac massage (OCCM) with aortic cross-clamp (ACC) versus receiving resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) with closed-chest compressions (CCCs). Patients who received REBOA were compared with patients receiving OCCM for traumatic arrest using continuous vital sign monitoring and videography. Thirty-three patients were enrolled in the REBOA group and 18 patients were enrolled in the OCCM group. Of the total patients, 86.3 per cent were male with a mean age of 36.2 ± 13.9 years. Ninety-four percent of patients suffered penetrating trauma in the OCCM group compared with 30.3 per cent of the REBOA group ( P = <0.001). Before aortic occlusion (AO), there was no difference in initial EtCO2 values, but mean, median, peak, and final EtCO2 values were lower in OCCM ( P < 0.005). During CPR after AO, the initial, mean, and median values were higher with REBOA ( P = 0.015, 0.036, and 0.038). The rate of return of spontaneous circulation was higher in REBOA versus OCCM (20/33 [60.1%] vs 5/18 [33.3%]; P = 0.04), and REBOA patients survived to operative intervention more frequently ( P = 0.038). REBOA patients had greater total cardiac compression fraction (CCF) before AO than OCCM (85.3 ± 12.7% vs 35.2 ± 18.6%, P < 0.0001) and after AO (88.3 ± 7.8% vs 71.9 ± 24.4%, P = 0.0052). REBOA patients have higher EtCO2 and cardiac compression fraction before and after AO compared with patients who receive OCCM.