Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta vs Pre-Peritoneal Packing in Patients with Pelvic Fracture.
Journal
Journal of the American College of Surgeons
ISSN: 1879-1190
Titre abrégé: J Am Coll Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9431305
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2021
01 2021
Historique:
received:
30
06
2020
revised:
28
07
2020
accepted:
31
08
2020
pubmed:
7
10
2020
medline:
15
9
2021
entrez:
6
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Pelvic hemorrhage is potentially lethal despite homeostatic interventions such as pre-peritoneal packing (PP), resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA), surgery, and/or angioembolization. REBOA may be used as an alternative/adjunct to PP for temporizing bleeding in patients with pelvic fractures. Our study aimed to compare the outcomes of REBOA and/or PP, as temporizing measures, in blunt pelvic fracture patients. We hypothesized that REBOA is associated with worsened outcomes. We performed a 2017 review of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS-TQIP) and identified trauma patients with blunt pelvic fractures who underwent REBOA placement and/or PP before laparotomy and/or angioembolization. Propensity score matching was performed, adjusting for demographics, vitals, mechanism of injury, ISS, each body region-AIS, and pelvic fracture type. Outcomes were complication rates and mortality. A total of 156 patients (PP: 52; REBOA: 52; REBOA+PP: 52) were matched and included. Mean age was 43 ± 18 years, Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 28 (range 17-32), and 74% were males. Overall mortality was 42%. The 24-hour mortality (25% vs 14% vs 35%; p = 0.042), in-hospital mortality (44% vs 29% vs 54%; p = 0.034), and 4-hour pRBC units transfused (15 [9-23] vs 10 [4-19] vs 16 [9-27]; p = 0.017) were lower in the REBOA group. The REBOA group had faster times to both laparotomy (p = 0.040) and/or angioembolization (p = 0.012). There was no difference between the groups in acute kidney injury, lower limb amputations, or hospital and ICU length of stay among survivors. REBOA is a less invasive procedure compared with PP and is associated with improved outcomes. Further clinical trials are needed to define the optimal patient who will benefit from REBOA.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Pelvic hemorrhage is potentially lethal despite homeostatic interventions such as pre-peritoneal packing (PP), resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA), surgery, and/or angioembolization. REBOA may be used as an alternative/adjunct to PP for temporizing bleeding in patients with pelvic fractures. Our study aimed to compare the outcomes of REBOA and/or PP, as temporizing measures, in blunt pelvic fracture patients. We hypothesized that REBOA is associated with worsened outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN
We performed a 2017 review of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS-TQIP) and identified trauma patients with blunt pelvic fractures who underwent REBOA placement and/or PP before laparotomy and/or angioembolization. Propensity score matching was performed, adjusting for demographics, vitals, mechanism of injury, ISS, each body region-AIS, and pelvic fracture type. Outcomes were complication rates and mortality.
RESULTS
A total of 156 patients (PP: 52; REBOA: 52; REBOA+PP: 52) were matched and included. Mean age was 43 ± 18 years, Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 28 (range 17-32), and 74% were males. Overall mortality was 42%. The 24-hour mortality (25% vs 14% vs 35%; p = 0.042), in-hospital mortality (44% vs 29% vs 54%; p = 0.034), and 4-hour pRBC units transfused (15 [9-23] vs 10 [4-19] vs 16 [9-27]; p = 0.017) were lower in the REBOA group. The REBOA group had faster times to both laparotomy (p = 0.040) and/or angioembolization (p = 0.012). There was no difference between the groups in acute kidney injury, lower limb amputations, or hospital and ICU length of stay among survivors.
CONCLUSIONS
REBOA is a less invasive procedure compared with PP and is associated with improved outcomes. Further clinical trials are needed to define the optimal patient who will benefit from REBOA.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33022396
pii: S1072-7515(20)32303-6
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2020.08.763
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
17-26.e2Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.