Carr Marcus E
School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
Mil Med. 2004 Dec;169(12 Suppl):11-5, 4. doi: 10.7205/milmed.169.12s.11.
Bleeding is clearly a major cause of morbidity and death after trauma. When bleeding is attributable to transection of major vessels, surgical repair is appropriate. Posttraumatic microvascular bleeding attributable to coagulopathy secondary to metabolic derangements, hypothermia, and depletion or dysfunction of cellular and protein components requires a different approach. Although transfusion of blood products may be necessary to replace the blood loss, it does not always correct the problem of microvascular bleeding. The type of injury, mode of care, and treatment objectives differ significantly for combat-wounded soldiers versus civilian trauma patients. Although hemorrhage is responsible for 50% of combat deaths, published information about coagulation monitoring among combat patients is very limited. These articles summarize the appropriate monitoring of hemostasis among combat trauma patients, review the unique nature of combat casualties and the medical system used to treat them, and discuss information available from civilian studies. Because the development of coagulopathy is relatively infrequent in the young, otherwise healthy, military population, the routine screening measures currently used are adequate to guide initial blood product administration. However, as new intravenous hemostatic agents are used for these patients, better laboratory measures will be required. Although hemorrhage is the leading cause of death for combat casualties, catastrophic hemorrhage is rarely a prehospital combat medical management problem because, when it occurs, it tends to cause death before medical care can be provided. In civilian environments, most seriously injured victims can be reached and transported by emergency medical services personnel within minutes; in combat, it often takes hours simply to transport casualties off the battlefield. In combat situations, even if the transport distances are small, the hazardous nature of the forward combat areas frequently prevents medical personnel from quickly reaching the wounded. Furthermore, whereas civilian blunt trauma victims may have a "golden hour," casualties with penetrating battlefield trauma often have only a "platinum 5 minutes." Because of the challenges of treating hemorrhage during combat, it is important for military medical personnel to understand their options for treating hemorrhage quickly and efficiently. These articles discuss the causes of posttraumatic microvascular bleeding and the potential treatment options for controlling catastrophic hemorrhage in combat areas.
出血显然是创伤后发病和死亡的主要原因。当出血是由于大血管横断所致时,手术修复是合适的。因代谢紊乱、体温过低以及细胞和蛋白质成分耗竭或功能障碍继发凝血病引起的创伤后微血管出血则需要不同的处理方法。尽管可能需要输注血液制品来补充失血,但这并不总能解决微血管出血问题。战斗受伤士兵与平民创伤患者的损伤类型、护理模式和治疗目标有显著差异。尽管出血导致了50%的战斗死亡,但关于战斗患者凝血监测的公开信息非常有限。这些文章总结了战斗创伤患者止血的适当监测方法,回顾了战斗伤亡人员的独特性质以及用于治疗他们的医疗系统,并讨论了来自 civilian 研究的可用信息。由于在年轻、健康的军人中凝血病的发生相对较少,目前使用的常规筛查措施足以指导初始血液制品的使用。然而,随着新型静脉止血剂用于这些患者,将需要更好的实验室检测方法。尽管出血是战斗伤亡人员的主要死因,但灾难性出血很少是院前战斗医疗管理问题,因为当它发生时,往往在提供医疗护理之前就导致死亡。在 civilian 环境中,大多数重伤受害者可以在几分钟内被紧急医疗服务人员送达并转运;在战斗中,仅仅将伤员运离战场往往需要数小时。在战斗情况下,即使运输距离很短,前方战斗区域的危险性质也常常使医务人员无法迅速到达伤员身边。此外, civilian 钝性创伤受害者可能有“黄金一小时”,而战场穿透性创伤伤员通常只有“白金五分钟”。由于在战斗中治疗出血面临挑战,军事医务人员了解快速有效治疗出血的选择非常重要。这些文章讨论了创伤后微血管出血的原因以及控制战区灾难性出血的潜在治疗选择。