PurposeResuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a technique for temporary stabilization of patients with non-compressible torso hemorrhage. This technique has been increasingly used worldwide during the past decade. Despite the good outcomes of translational studies, clinical studies are divided. The aim of this multicenter-international study was to capture REBOA-specific data and outcomes.MethodsREBOA practicing centers were invited to join this online register, which was established in September 2014. REBOA cases were reported, both retrospective and prospective. Demographics, injury patterns, hemodynamic variables, REBOA-specific data, complications and 30-days mortality were reported.ResultsNinety-six cases from 6 different countries were reported between 2011 and 2016. Mean age was 52 ± 22 years and 88% of the cases were blunt trauma with a median injury severity score (ISS) of 41 (IQR 29–50). In the majority of the cases, Zone I REBOA was used. Median systolic blood pressure before balloon inflation was 60 mmHg (IQR 40–80), which increased to 100 mmHg (IQR 80–128) after inflation. Continuous occlusion was applied in 52% of the patients, and 48% received non-continuous occlusion. Occlusion time longer than 60 min was reported as 38 and 14% in the non-continuous and continuous groups, respectively. Complications, such as extremity compartment syndrome (n = 3), were only noted in the continuous occlusion group. The 30-day mortality for non-continuous REBOA was 48%, and 64% for continuous occlusion.ConclusionsThis observational multicenter study presents results regarding continuous and non-continuous REBOA with favorable outcomes. However, further prospective studies are needed to be able to draw conclusions on morbidity and mortality.

No abstract

Earthquakes continue to exact a heavy toll on life, injury, and loss of property. Survival of casualties extricated from under the rubble depends upon early medical interventions by emergency teams on site. The objective of this paper is to review the pertinent literature and to analyze the information as a practical guideline for the medical management of casualties accidentally buried alive.

Despite the small sample size of this study, the presented data suggest that some patients with ICB can be safely and definitively managed in centers with no on-site neurosurgical service. The need for transfer may be based on telemedicine consultation or clinical -radiologic guidelines. Further larger scale studies are warranted.

Objective: To assess the effect of teleradiology upon the need for transfer of head injured victims requiring hospitalisation but referred initially to a rural level 2 trauma centre without neurosurgical capacity. Methods: Head injured patients requiring hospitalisation, admitted to a rural level 2 trauma centre between August 2003 and August 2005, were identified. A digitalised copy of the computed tomographic (CT) scan was transferred to the neurosurgical referral centre via teleradiology and was available for review by the neurosurgeon on-call, who then, together with the trauma surgeon in the rural level 2 trauma centre, decided whether to transfer the patient to the neurosurgical referral centre. Results: Of 209 trauma victims with neurosurgical pathology in need of hospitalisation, 126 (60.2%) were immediately transferred while 83 (39.7%) of the patients were hospitalised in the rural level 2 trauma centre for observation. Two (2.4%) failed the intent to treat locally. One patient, suffering from multi-trauma, was stabilised after damage control laparotomy only to succumb to an enlarging epidural haematoma. Another patient was transferred 2 days after admission because of difficulty in clinical evaluation due to a previously existing neurological disorder, but no active treatment was necessary. All other 81 patients recovered uneventfully. Conclusions: Selective head injured patients with pathological CT scan may be safely managed in level 2 trauma centres. A committed trauma team in the rural trauma centre, neurosurgical consultation and availability of a teleradiology system are requisites. Currently existing transfer criteria should be carefully reevaluated.