IMPORTANCE The need for improved methods of hemorrhage control and resuscitation has resulted in a reappraisal of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA). However, there is a paucity of data regarding the use of REBOA on a multi-institutional level in the United States. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the outcomes in trauma patients after REBOA placement. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A case-control retrospective analysis was performed of the 2015-2016 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program data set, a national multi-institutional database of trauma patients in the United States. A total of 593 818 adult trauma patients (aged Ն18 years) were analyzed and 420 patients were matched and included in the study; patients who were dead on arrival or were transferred from other facilities were excluded. Trauma patients who underwent REBOA placement in the ED were identified and matched with a similar cohort of patients (the no-REBOA group). Both groups were matched in a 1:2 ratio using propensity score matching for demographics, vital signs, mechanism of injury, injury severity score, head abbreviated injury scale score, each body region abbreviated injury scale score, pelvic fractures, lower extremity vascular injuries and fractures, and number and grades of intra-abdominal solid organ injuries. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Outcome measures were the rates of complications and mortality. RESULTS Of 593 818 trauma patients, 420 patients (the REBOA group, 140 patients; 36 women and 104 men; mean [SD] age, 44 [20] years; the no-REBOA group, 280 patients; 77 women and 203 men; mean [SD] age, 43 [19] years) were matched and included in the analysis. Among the REBOA group, median injury severity score was 29 (interquartile range [IQR], 18-38) and 129 patients (92.1%) had a blunt mechanism of injury. There was no significant difference between groups in median 4-hour blood transfusion

Therapeutic studies, level IV.

Both LVMR and RVMR are similar in terms of safety and efficacy. Although not randomized, this data may suggest a better functional outcome and quality of life in patients having RVMR for ERP.

INTRODUCTION Post-traumatic hemorrhage is the most common preventable cause of death in trauma. Numerous small single-center studies have shown the superiority of four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4-PCC) along with fresh frozen plasma (FFP) over FFP alone in resuscitation of trauma patients. The aim of our study was to evaluate outcomes of severely injured trauma patients who received 4-PCC + FFP compared to FPP alone. METHODS Two-year (2015–2016) analysis of the American College of Surgeons-Trauma Quality Improvement Program database. All adult (age ≥18 years) trauma patients who received 4-PCC + FFP or FFP alone were included. We excluded patients who were on preinjury anticoagulants. Patients were stratified into two groups: 4-PCC + FFP versus FFP alone and were matched in a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching for demographics, vitals, injury parameters, comorbidities, and level of trauma centers. Outcome measures were packed red blood cells, plasma and platelets transfused, complications, and mortality. RESULTS A total of 468 patients (4-PCC + FFP, 234; FFP alone, 234) were matched. Mean age was 50 ± 21 years; 70% were males; median injury severity score was 27 [20–36], and 86% had blunt injuries. Four-PCC + FFP was associated with a decreased requirement for packed red blood cells (6 units vs. 10 units; p = 0.02) and FFP (3 units vs. 6 units; p = 0.01) transfusion compared to FFP alone. Patients who received 4-PCC + FFP had a lower mortality (17.5% vs. 27.7%, p = 0.01) and lower rates of acute respiratory distress syndrome (1.3% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.04) and acute kidney injury (2.1% vs. 7.3%, p = 0.01). There was no difference in the rates of deep venous thrombosis (p = 0.11) and pulmonary embolism (p = 0.33), adverse discharge disposition (p = 0.21), and platelets transfusion (p = 0.72) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Our study demonstrates that the use of 4-PCC as an adjunct to FFP is associated with improved survival and reduction in transfusion requirements compared to FFP alone in resuscitation of severely injured trauma patients. Further studies are required to evaluate the role of addition of PCC to the massive transfusion protocol. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic studies, level III.