PurposeA high percentage (50%-60%) of trauma patients die due to their injuries prior to arrival at the hospital. Studies on preclinical mortality including post-mortem examinations are rare. In this review, we summarized the literature focusing on clinical and preclinical mortality and studies included post-mortem examinations.MethodsA literature search was conducted using PubMed/Medline database for relevant medical literature in English or German language published within the last four decades (1980–2015). The following MeSH search terms were used in different combinations: “multiple trauma”, “epidemiology”, “mortality “, “cause of death”, and “autopsy”. References from available studies were searched as well.ResultsMarked differences in demographic parameters and injury severity between studies were identified. Moreover, the incidence of penetrating injuries has shown a wide range (between 4% and 38%). Both unimodal and bimodal concepts of trauma mortality have been favored. Studies have shown a wide variation in time intervals used to analyze the distribution of death. Thus, it is difficult to say which distribution is correct.ConclusionsWe have identified variable results indicating bimodal or unimodal death distribution. Further more stundardized studies in this field are needed. We would like to encourage investigators to choose the inclusion criteria more critically and to consider factors affecting the pattern of mortality.

The majority of patients died on scene from severe head and thoracic injuries. A homogenous distribution of death was observed after an initial peak of death on scene. Moreover, several factors such as injury pattern and regional location of collisions may also affect the pattern of mortality.

BackgroundSeverely injured patients experience substantial immunological stress in the aftermath of traumatic insult, which often results in systemic immune dysregulation. Regulatory T cells (Treg) play a key role in the suppression of the immune response and in the maintenance of immunological homeostasis. Little is known about their presence and dynamics in blood after trauma, and nothing is known about Treg in the porcine polytrauma model. Here, we assessed different subsets of Treg in trauma patients (TP) and compared those to either healthy volunteers (HV) or data from porcine polytrauma.MethodsPeripheral blood was withdrawn from 20 TP with injury severity score (ISS) ≥16 at the admittance to the emergency department (ED), and subsequently on day 1 and at day 3. Ten HV were included as controls (ctrl). The porcine polytrauma model consisted of a femur fracture, liver laceration, lung contusion, and hemorrhagic shock resulting in an ISS of 27. After polytrauma, the animals underwent resuscitation and surgical fracture fixation. Blood samples were withdrawn before and immediately after trauma, 24 and 72 h later. Different subsets of Treg, CD4+CD25+, CD4+CD25+FoxP3+, CD4+CD25+CD127−, and CD4+CD25+CD127−FoxP3+ were characterized by flow cytometry.ResultsAbsolute cell counts of leukocytes were significantly increasing after trauma, and again decreasing in the follow-up in human and porcine samples. The proportion of human Treg in the peripheral blood of TP admitted to the ED was lower when compared to HV. Their numbers did not recover until 72 h after trauma. Comparable data were found for all subsets. The situation in the porcine trauma model was comparable with the clinical data. In porcine peripheral blood before trauma, we could identify Treg with the typical immunophenotype (CD4+CD25+CD127−), which were virtually absent immediately after trauma. Similar to the human situation, most of these cells expressed FoxP3, as assessed by intracellular FACS stain.ConclusionDespite minor percental differences in the recovery of Treg populations after trauma, our findings show a comparable decrease of Treg early after polytrauma, and strengthen the immunological significance of the porcine polytrauma model. Furthermore, the Treg subpopulation CD4+CD25+CD127− was characterized in porcine samples.

BackgroundSelective non-operative management (NOM) for the treatment of blunt splenic trauma is safe. Currently, the feasibility of selective NOM for penetrating splenic injury (PSI) is unclear. Unfortunately, little is known about the success rate of spleen-preserving surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of selective NOM for penetrating splenic injuries.MethodsA dual-centre study is performed in two level-one trauma centres. All identified patients treated for PSI were identified. Patients were grouped based on the treatment they received. Group one consisted of splenectomised patients, the second group included patients treated by a spleen-preserving surgical intervention, and group three included those patients who were treated by NOM.ResultsA total of 118 patients with a median age of 27 and a median ISS of 25 (interquartile range (IQR) 16–34) were included. Ninety-six patients required operative intervention, of whom 45 underwent a total splenectomy and 51 underwent spleen-preserving surgical procedures. Furthermore, 22 patients (12 stab wounds and 10 gunshot wounds) were treated by NOM. There were several anticipated significant differences in the baseline encountered. The median hospitalization time was 8 (5–12) days, with no significant differences between the groups. The splenectomy group had significantly more intensive care unit (ICU) days (2(0–6) vs. 0(0–1)) and ventilation days (1(0–3) vs. 0(0–0)) compared to the NOM group. Mortality was only noted in the splenectomy group.ConclusionsSpleen-preserving surgical therapy for PSI is a feasible treatment modality and is not associated with increased mortality. Moreover, a select group of patients can be treated without any surgical intervention at all.

No abstract

Purpose SARS CoV-2 (COVID-19) represents a pandemic that has led to adjustments of routine clinical practices. The initial management in the trauma bay follows detailed international valid algorithms. This study aims to work out potential adjustments of trauma bay algorithms during a global pandemic in order to reduce contamination and to increase safety for patients and medical personnel. Methods This retrospective cohort study compared patients admitted to the trauma bay of one academic level-one trauma centre in March and April 2019 with patients admitted in March and April 2020. Based on these datasets, possible adjustments of the current international guidelines of trauma bay management were discussed. Results Group Pan (2020, n = 30) included two-thirds the number of patients compared with Group Ref (2019, n = 44). The number of severely injured patients comparable amongst these groups: mean injury severity score (ISS) was significantly lower in Group Pan (10.5 ± 4.4 points) compared with Group Ref (15.3 ± 9.2 points, p = 0.035). Duration from admission to whole-body CT was significantly higher in Group Pan (23.8 ± 9.4 min) compared with Group Ref (17.3 ± 10.7 min, p = 0.046). Number of trauma bay admissions decreased, as did the injury severity for patients admitted in March and April 2020. In order to contain spreading of SARS Cov-2, the suggested recommendations of adjusting trauma bay protocols for severely injured patients include (1) minimizing trauma bay team members with direct contact to the patient; (2) reducing repeated examination as much as possible, with rationalized use of protective equipment; and (3) preventing potential secondary inflammatory insults. Conclusion Appropriate adjustments of trauma bay protocols during pandemics should improve safety for both patients and medical personnel while guaranteeing the optimal treatment quality. The above-mentioned proposals have the potential to improve safety during trauma bay management in a time of a global pandemic.

BackgroundGeriatric acetabular fractures require fixation with sufficient primary stability to allow for immediate full-weight bearing. Minimally-invasive procedures would be desirable in order to keep perioperative morbidity low. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical strength of lag screw-only fixation of anterior column posterior hemi-transverse (ACPHT) acetabular fractures to standard anatomical plate fixation.MethodsStandardized ACPHT fractures were created in fourth generation synthetic pelvis models and stabilized by either an anatomical buttress plate (n = 4) or by a screw-only construct (n = 4). In a validated setup, a cyclic loading protocol was applied with increasing axial force (3200 cycles, 175 N to 2250 N). Construct survival, acetabular fracture motion, and mode of failure were assessed.ResultsThe median number of cycles needed until failure of the construct occurred was 2304 cycles (range, 2020 to 2675) in the plate fixation group and 3200 cycles (range, 3101 to 3200) for the screw fixation constructs (p = .003). With regard to energy absorbed until failure, the plate fixation group resisted to 1.57 × 106 N*cycles (range, 1.21 × 106 to 2.14 × 106) and the screw fixation group to 3.17 × 106 N*cycles (range, 2.92 × 106 to 3.17 × 106; p = .001). All plate fixation specimens failed with a break-out of the posterior-column screw in the quadrilateral wing of the anatomical plate within a maximum load of 1750 N while the screw fixation constructs all survived loading of at least 2100 N. Acetabular fracture gap motion, acetabular rim angle, and medial femoral head subluxation as measures of fracture displacement were all not different between the two groups (p > 0.1).ConclusionsIn this in vitro biomechanical study, screw-only fixation of an ACPHT acetabular fracture resulted in at least as good construct survival as seen for standard buttress plate fixation. Both methods resisted sufficiently to forces that would be expected under physiologic conditions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-019-2422-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundNonoperative management for blunt splenic injury is the preferred treatment. To improve the outcome of selective nonoperative therapy, the current challenge is to identify factors that predict failure. Little is known about the impact of concomitant injury on outcome. Our study has two goals. First, to determine whether concomitant injury affects the safety of selective nonoperative treatment. Secondly we aimed to identify factors that can predict failure.MethodsFrom our prospective trauma registry we selected all nonoperatively treated adult patients with blunt splenic trauma admitted between 01.01.2000 and 12.21.2013. All concurrent injuries with an AIS ≥ 2 were scored. We grouped and compared patients sustaining solitary splenic injuries and patients with concomitant injuries. To identify specific factors that predict failure we used a multivariable regression analysis.ResultsA total of 79 patients were included. Failure of nonoperative therapy (n = 11) and complications only occurred in patients sustaining concomitant injury. Furthermore, ICU-stay as well as hospitalization time were significantly prolonged in the presence of associated injury (4 versus 13 days,p < 0.05). Mortality was not seen. Multivariable analysis revealed the presence of a femur fracture and higher age as predictors of failure.ConclusionsNonoperative management for hemodynamically normal patients with blunt splenic injury is feasible and safe, even in the presence of concurrent (non-hollow organ) injuries or a contrast blush on CT. However, associated injuries are related to prolonged intensive care unit- and hospital stay, complications, and failure of nonoperative management. Specifically, higher age and the presence of a femur fracture are predictors of failure.