BACKGROUND:Knowledge on practice patterns for aortic occlusion (AO) in the setting of severe pelvic fractures is limited. This study aimed to describe clinical outcomes based on number and types of interventions after zone 3 resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) deployment. METHODS:A retrospective review of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery multicenter registry was performed for patients who underwent zone 3 AO from 2013 to 2020. Patients with a blunt mechanism who survived beyond the emergency department were included. Interventions evaluated were preperitoneal pelvic packing (PP), angioembolization (AE), and external fixation (EF) of the pelvis. Management approaches were compared against the primary outcome of mortality. Secondary outcomes included transfusion requirements, overall complications and acute kidney injury (AKI). RESULTS:Of 207 patients who underwent zone 3 AO, 160 (77.3%) fit the inclusion criteria. Sixty (37.5%) underwent AO alone, 50 (31.3%) underwent a second hemostatic intervention, and 49 (30.6%) underwent a third hemostatic intervention. Overall mortality was 37.7% (n = 60). There were no differences in mortality based on any number or combination of interventions. On multivariable regression, only EF was associated with a mortality reduction (odds ratio, 0.22; p = 0.011). Increasing number of interventions were associated with higher transfusion and complication rates. Pelvic packing + AE was associated with increased AKI than PP or AE alone (73.3% vs. 29.5% and 28.6%, p = 0.005), and AE was associated with increased AKI resulting in dialysis than PP alone (17.9% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.036). CONCLUSION:Zone 3 REBOA can be used as a standalone hemorrhage control technique and as an adjunct in the management of severe pelvic fractures. The only additional intervention associated with a mortality reduction was EF. The benefit of increasing number of interventions must be weighed against more harm. Heterogeneity in practice patterns for REBOA use in pelvic fracture management underscores the need for an evidence base to standardize care.

No abstract

Background Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) is controversial as a hemorrhage control adjunct due to lack of data with a suitable control group. We aimed to determine outcomes of trauma patients in shock undergoing REBOA versus no-REBOA. Methods This single-center, retrospective, matched cohort study analyzed patients ≥16 years in hemorrhagic shock without cardiac arrest (2000–2019). REBOA (R; 2015–2019) patients were propensity matched 2:1 to historic (H; 2000–2012) and contemporary (C; 2013–2019) groups. In-hospital mortality and 30-day survival were analyzed using chi-squared and log rank testing, respectively. Results A total of 102,481 patients were included (R = 57, C = 88,545, H = 13,879). Propensity scores were assigned using age, race, mechanism, lowest systolic blood pressure, lowest Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), and body region Abbreviated Injury Scale scores to generate matched groups (R = 57, C = 114, H = 114). In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in the REBOA group (19.3%) compared to the contemporary (35.1%; p = 0.024) and historic (44.7%; p = 0.001) groups. 30-day survival was significantly higher in the REBOA versus no-REBOA groups. Conclusion In a high-volume center where its use is part of a coordinated hemorrhage control strategy, REBOA is associated with improved survival in patients with noncompressible torso hemorrhage.

Limited evidence-based protocols exist regarding the management of venous pseudoaneurysms. Cases reports have documented surgical treatments including endovascular coil embolization or suture ligation in the setting of hemodynamic stability. Depending on the location of the venous injury, a more conservative approach to a stable pseudoaneurysm may be advantageous. This report describes a case of a patient who sustained a blunt traumatic common iliac vein pseudoaneurysm who was successfully managed non-operatively.

Objectives Changes in vascular trauma care and trainee exposure to vascular surgery have raised questions regarding who should take care of vascular trauma patients. This study aimed to determine nationwide trends and perceptions regarding the management of vascular trauma amongst vascular and trauma surgeons. Material and Methods Online surveys were administered to trauma surgeons through the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) and to vascular surgeons through the Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Society (VESS) and Western Vascular Society (WVS) in February 2021. Demographics, practice-related information, and interest in, experience and comfort level with vascular trauma were queried. Trainees and those practicing outside the United States were excluded. Results were analyzed using Stata/BE v16.1. Results 247 surgeons were included in the final study population, of which 163 (66%) were trauma surgeons (T) and 84 (34%) were vascular surgeons (V). Vascular surgeons were younger (46 v 51y, P < .001) and had fewer years in practice (10 v 17y, P < .001). Vascular surgeons had greater experience and comfort with managing vascular trauma, but less interest in both vascular and endovascular trauma care when compared to trauma surgeons. Inability to maintain skillset (27%) and unfamiliarity with techniques (32%) were the most common barriers to practicing vascular trauma cited by trauma surgeons. Discussion Despite significant interest in practicing vascular trauma amongst trauma surgeons compared to vascular surgeons, most feel unprepared to do so. Collaboration between vascular and trauma surgeons could close the experience gap and appeal to the interests of both groups.

Objective To compare primiparous and multiparous women who develop obstetric fistula (OF) and to assess predictors of fistula location Design Cross-sectional study Setting Fistula Care Center at Bwaila Hospital, Lilongwe, Malawi Population Women with OF who presented between September 2011 and July 2014 with a complete obstetric history were eligible for the study. Methods Women with OF were surveyed for their obstetric history. Women were classified as multiparous if prior vaginal or cesarean delivery was reported. Location of fistula was determined at operation. OF involving the urethra, bladder neck, and midvagina were classified as low; OF involving the vaginal apex, cervix, uterus, and ureters were classified as high. Main Outcome Measures Demographic information was compared between primiparous and multiparous women using Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U tests. Multivariate logistic regression models were implemented to assess the relationship between variables of interest and fistula location. Results During the study period, 533 women presented for repair, of which 452 (84.8%) were included in the analysis. The majority (56.6%) were multiparous when the fistula formed. Multiparous women were more likely to have labored less than a day (62.4% vs 44.5%, p<0.001), delivered a live-born infant (26.8% vs 17.9%, p=0.026), and have a high fistula location (37.5% vs 11.2%, p<0.001). Multiparity (aOR=4.55, 95% CI 2.27–9.12) and history of cesarean delivery (aOR=4.11, 95% CI 2.45–6.89) were associated with development of a high fistula. Conclusions Multiparity was common in our cohort, and these women were more likely to have a high fistula. Additional research is needed to understand the etiology of high fistula including potential iatrogenic causes.

Major pelvic hemorrhage remains a considerable challenge of modern trauma care associated with mortality in over a third of patients. Efforts to improve outcomes demand continued research into the optimal employment of both traditional and newer hemostatic adjuncts across the full spectrum of emergent care environments. The purpose of this review is to provide a concise description of the rationale for and effective use of currently available adjuncts for the control of pelvic hemorrhage. In addition, the challenges of defining the optimal order and algorithm for employment of these adjuncts will be outlined.

No abstract