No abstract

Objective: During the COVID-19 pandemic, central venous access line teams were implemented at many hospitals throughout the world to provide access for critically ill patients. The objective of this study was to describe the structure, practice patterns, and outcomes of these vascular access teams during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, self-reported study of central venous access line teams in hospitals afflicted with the COVID-19 pandemic. To participate in the study, hospitals were required to meet one of the following criteria: development of a formal plan for a central venous access line team during the pandemic; implementation of a central venous access line team during the pandemic; placement of central venous access by a designated practice group during the pandemic as part of routine clinical practice; or management of an iatrogenic complication related to central venous access in a patient with COVID-19. Results: Participants from 60 hospitals in 13 countries contributed data to the study. Central venous line teams were most commonly composed of vascular surgery and general surgery attending physicians and trainees. Twenty sites had 2657 lines placed by their central venous access line team or designated practice group. During that time, there were 11 (0.4%) iatrogenic complications associated with central venous access procedures performed by the line team or group at those 20 sites. Triple lumen catheters, Cordis (Santa Clara, Calif) catheters, and nontunneled hemodialysis catheters were the most common types of central venous lines placed by the teams. Eight (14%) sites reported experience in placing central venous lines in prone, ventilated patients with COVID-19. A dedicated line cart was used by 35 (59%) of the hospitals. Less than 50% (24 [41%]) of the participating sites reported managing thrombosed central lines in COVID-19 patients. Twentythree of the sites managed 48 iatrogenic complications in patients with COVID-19 (including complications caused by providers outside of the line team or designated practice group). Conclusions: Implementation of a dedicated central venous access line team during a pandemic or other health care crisis is a way by which physicians trained in central venous access can contribute their expertise to a stressed health care system. A line team composed of physicians with vascular skill sets provides relief to resource-constrained intensive care unit, ward, and emergency medicine teams with a low rate of iatrogenic complications relative to historical reports. We recommend that a plan for central venous access line team implementation be in place for future health care crises.

BackgroundOpen pelvic fracture, caused by a blunt mechanism, is an uncommon injury with a high mortality rate. In 2008, evidence-based algorithm for managing pelvic fractures in unstable patients was published by the Western Trauma Association (WTA). The use of massive transfusion protocols has become widespread as has the availability and use of pelvic angiography. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of open pelvic fractures in association with related advances in trauma care.MethodsA retrospective review was performed, at an American College of Surgeon verified level I trauma center, of patients with blunt open pelvic fractures from January 2010 to April 2016. The WTA algorithm, including massive transfusion protocol, and pelvic angiography were uniformly used. Data collected included injury severity score, demographic data, transfusion requirements, use of pelvic angiography, length of stay, and disposition. Data were compared with a similar study from 2005.ResultsDuring the study period, 1505 patients with pelvic fractures were analyzed; 87 (6%) patients had open pelvic fractures. Of these, 25 were from blunt mechanisms and made up the study population. Patients in both studies had similar injury severity scores, ages, Glasgow Coma Scale, and gender distributions. Use of angiography was higher (44% vs. 16%; P=0.011) and mortality was lower (16% vs. 45%; P=0.014) than in the 2005 study.ConclusionsChanges in trauma care for patients with open blunt pelvic fracture include the use of an evidence-based algorithm, massive transfusion protocols and increased use of angioembolization. Mortality for open pelvic fractures has decreased with these advances.Level of evidenceLevel IV.

Care management/therapeutic study, level IV; epidemiologic/prognostic study, level III.