Hemorrhagic shock in pediatric trauma patients remains a challenging yet preventable cause of death. There is little high-quality evidence available to guide specific aspects of hemorrhage control and specific resuscitation practices in this population. We sought to generate clinical recommendations, expert consensus, and good practice statements to aid providers in care for these difficult patients. The Pediatric Traumatic Hemorrhagic Shock Consensus Conference process included systematic reviews related to six subtopics and one consensus meeting. A panel of 16 consensus multidisciplinary committee members evaluated the literature related to 6 specific topics: (1) blood products and fluid resuscitation for hemostatic resuscitation, (2) utilization of prehospital blood products, (3) use of hemostatic adjuncts, (4) tourniquet use, (5) prehospital airway and blood pressure management, and (6) conventional coagulation tests or thromboelastography-guided resuscitation. A total of 21 recommendations are detailed in this article: 2 clinical recommendations, 14 expert consensus statements, and 5 good practice statements. The statement, the panel's voting outcome, and the rationale for each statement intend to give pediatric trauma providers the latest evidence and guidance to care for pediatric trauma patients experiencing hemorrhagic shock.With a broad multidisciplinary representation, the Pediatric Traumatic Hemorrhagic Shock Consensus Conference systematically evaluated the literature and developed clinical recommendations, expert consensus, and good practice statements concerning topics in traumatically injured pediatric patients with hemorrhagic shock.

No abstract

BACKGROUND Blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) can result in thromboembolic stroke. Many trauma centers selectively screen patients with cervical computed tomographic angiography (CTA) based on clinical criteria. In 2016, our institution adopted universal screening for BCVI for all blunt trauma patients. The aim of this study was to accurately determine the incidence of BCVI and to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the Denver criteria (DC), expanded Denver criteria (eDC), and Memphis criteria (MC) in selecting patients for screening. METHODS Retrospective cohort study of adult (≥16 years) blunt trauma patients who presented to the Level I trauma center at University of Alabama at Birmingham. We reviewed all CTA reports and selected CTA images to obtain the true incidence rate of BCVI. We then evaluated the diagnostic performance of the DC, eDC, and MC. RESULTS A total of 6,800 patients who had suffered blunt trauma were evaluated, of whom 6,287 (92.5%) had a neck CTA. Of these, 480 (7.6%) patients had CTA evidence of BCVI. The eDC identified the most BCVI cases (sensitivity 74.7%) but had the lowest positive predictive value (14.6%). The DC and MC had slightly greater positive predictive values (19.6% and 20.6%, respectively) and had the highest diagnostic ability in terms of likelihood ratio (2.8 and 2.9) but had low sensitivity (57.5% and 47.3%). Consequently, if relying on the traditional screening criteria, the DC, eDC, and MC would have respectively resulted in 42.5%, 25.3%, and 52.7% of patients with BCVI identified by universal screening not receiving a neck CTA to screen for BCVI. CONCLUSION Blunt cerebrovascular injury is even more common than previously thought. The diagnostic performance of selective clinical screening criteria is poor. Consideration should be given to the implementation of universal screening for BCVI using neck CTA in all blunt trauma patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic, level III.

OBJECTIVEPreoperative embolization of meningiomas can facilitate their resection when they are difficult to remove. The optimal use and timing of such a procedure remains controversial given the risk of embolization-linked morbidity in select clinical settings. In this work, the authors used a large national database to study the impact of immediate preoperative embolization on the immediate outcomes of meningioma resection.METHODSMeningioma patients who had undergone elective resection were identified in the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) for the period 2002–2014. Patients who had undergone preoperative embolization were propensity score matched to those who had not, adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. Associations between preoperative embolization and morbidity, mortality, and nonroutine discharge were investigated.RESULTSOverall, 27,008 admissions met the inclusion criteria, and 633 patients (2.34%) had undergone preoperative embolization and 26,375 (97.66%) had not. The embolization group was younger (55.17 vs 57.69 years, p < 0.001) with a lower proportion of females (63.5% vs 69.1%, p = 0.003), higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (p = 0.002), and higher disease severity (p < 0.001). Propensity score matching retained 413 embolization and 413 nonembolization patients. In the matched cohort, preoperative embolization was associated with increased rates of cerebral edema (25.2% vs 17.7%, p = 0.009), posthemorrhagic anemia or transfusion (21.8% vs 13.8%, p = 0.003), and nonroutine discharge (42.8% vs 35.7%, p = 0.039). There was no difference in mortality (≤ 2.4% vs ≤ 2.4%, p = 0.82). Among the embolization patients, the mean interval from embolization to resection was 1.49 days. On multivariate analysis, a longer interval was significantly associated with nonroutine discharge (OR 1.33, p = 0.004) but not with complications or mortality.CONCLUSIONSRelative to meningioma patients who do not undergo preoperative embolization in the same admission, those who do have higher rates of cerebral edema and nonroutine discharge but not higher rates of stroke or death. Thus, meningiomas requiring preoperative embolization represent a distinct clinical entity that requires prolonged, more complex care. Further, among embolization patients, the timing of resection did not affect the risk of in-hospital complications, suggesting that the timing of surgery can be determined according to surgeon discretion.

No abstract

No abstract

Background We evaluated patient outcomes after early, small volume red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in the setting of presumed hemorrhagic shock. We hypothesized that transfusion with even small amounts of blood would be associated with more complications. Study design and methods Retrospective review of trauma patients admitted to a Level 1 trauma center between 2016–2021. Patients predicted to require massive transfusion who survived ≥72 h were categorized according to units of RBCs transfused in the first 24 h. A Cox regression model stratified by dichotomized ISS and adjusted for SBP <90 mm Hg and pulse >120 bpm on arrival was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes of interest. Results A total of 3121 (24%) received RBC transfusion within the first 24 h. Massive transfusion protocol (MTP) was activated in 38% (1188/3121): 17% received no RBCs, 27.4% 1–3 units, 32.4% 4–9 units, and 22.7% ≥10 units. Mean ISS increased with each category of RBC transfusion. There was no difference in the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), infection, cardiac arrest, venous thromboembolism or stroke for patients receiving 1–3 units compared to the non‐transfused group or 4–9 units group (p > 0.05). Compared to those receiving ≥10 units, the 1–3 units group had a significantly lower risk of AKI, ARDS, and cardiac arrest. Discussion Early empiric RBC transfusion for presumed hemorrhagic shock may subject patients to potential over‐transfusion and end‐organ damage. Among patients meeting clinical triggers for MTP, 1–3 units of allogeneic RBCs is not associated with worse outcomes.

No abstract