ObjectivesEarly complementopathy and coagulopathy are shown often after trauma. However, the prevalence of any interplay between complement cascade (ComC) and coagulation cascade (CoaC) after trauma remains unclear. This study intended to explore whether complement-coagulation crosstalk exists, which may provide a reliable guide to clinical implications in trauma patients.MethodsThis single-center cohort study of trauma patients enrolled 100 patients along with 20 healthy volunteers. Blood samples from patients were collected at admission, 45, 90, 135 minutes, and 18 hours after admission. Demographic characteristics were recorded, blood levels of ComC and CoaC factors, and inflammatory cytokines were measured by ELISA, clot-based assays, or luminex multiplex assay, and partial thromboplastin (PT) and partial thromboplastin time (PTT) were assessed using a Behring blood coagulation system.ResultsCompared with the healthy controls, plasma levels of complement factors (C5b-9 and Bb) and 11 tested inflammatory cytokines increased in moderately and severely injured patients as early as 45 minutes after admission and sustained higher levels up to 18 hours after admission. C5b-9 correlated positively to patients’ hospital stay. In parallel, the consumption of coagulation factors I, II, X, and XIII was shown throughout the first 18 hours after admission in moderately and severely injured patients, whereas PT, PTT, D-dimer, factor VII, and factor VIII values significantly increased from the admission to 135 minutes in moderately and severely injured patients. Along with an inverse correlation between plasma Bb, factors I and II, a positive correlation between C5b-9, Bb, D-dimer, PT, and PTT was evident.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates trauma-induced early activation of plasma cascades including ComC, CoaC, and fibrinolytic cascade, and their correlation between plasma cascades in severe trauma patients. Our study suggests that the simultaneous modulation of plasma cascades might benefit clinical outcomes for trauma patients.Level of evidenceProspective study, level III.

There is no all-encompassing or universally accepted definition of the difficult airway, and it has traditionally been approached as a problem chiefly rooted in anesthesiology. However, with airway obstruction reported as the second leading cause of mortality on the battlefield and first-pass success (FPS) rates for out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) as low as 46.4%, the need to better understand the difficult airway in the context of the prehospital setting is clear. In this review, we seek to redefine the concept of the “difficult airway” so that future research can target solutions better tailored for prehospital, and more specifically, combat casualty care. Contrasting the most common definitions, which narrow the scope of practice to physicians and a handful of interventions, we propose that the difficult airway is simply one that cannot be quickly obtained. This implies that it is a situation arrived at through a multitude of factors, namely the Patient, Operator, Setting, and Technology (POST), but also more importantly, the interplay between these elements. Using this amended definition and approach to the difficult to manage airway, we outline a target-specific approach to new research questions rooted in this system-based approach to better address the difficult airway in the prehospital and combat casualty care settings.