Suppr超能文献

创伤专家与儿科专家:小儿穿透伤治疗结果的比较

Trauma experts versus pediatric experts: comparison of outcomes in pediatric penetrating injuries.

作者信息

Miyata Shin, Cho Jayun, Lebedevskiy Olga, Matsushima Kazuhide, Bae Esther, Bliss David W

机构信息

Department of Pediatric Surgery, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.

Department of Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.

出版信息

J Surg Res. 2017 Feb;208:173-179. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.09.040. Epub 2016 Sep 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

While pediatric trauma centers (PTCs) can uniquely care for pediatric patients, adult trauma centers (ATCs) may be more accessible. Evidence is scarce regarding outcomes of pediatric patients with penetrating trauma treated at PTCs versus ATCs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study using the National Trauma Data Bank to identify pediatric patients aged ≤18 y with penetrating injuries from 2007 to 2012, treated at stand-alone PTCs or ATCs. We excluded patients treated at combined PTC or ATC, transferred between hospitals, with gunshot wounds (GSW) to the head, or dead on arrival. Eligible patients numbered 26,276 (PTC, n = 3737; ATC, n = 22,539). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcome was discharge location as a potential surrogate for functional outcome. Univariate and multivariate analyses assessed trauma center type as an independent risk factor for outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients treated at ATCs were more likely to have Injury Severity Score >15, Glasgow Coma Scale <9, GSW, cardiovascular injuries, and emergent operations (P < 0.001). Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for mortality favored PTCs but without statistical significance (OR, 0.592; P = 0.054). In subgroup analyses, children with aged ≤12 y, those with GSW injury mechanism, and those who underwent emergent operations at PTCs were more frequently discharged home versus elsewhere (OR, 0.327, 0.483, and 0.394; P values <0.001, <0.001, and 0.004, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Children with penetrating injuries demonstrated equivalent survival outcomes whether they were treated at PTCs or ATCs. Younger pediatric patients may have superior functional outcomes when treated at PTCs.

摘要

背景

虽然儿科创伤中心(PTC)能够为儿科患者提供独特的护理,但成人创伤中心(ATC)可能更容易到达。关于在PTC与ATC接受治疗的穿透性创伤儿科患者的结局,证据稀少。

材料与方法

我们使用国家创伤数据库进行了一项回顾性研究,以确定2007年至2012年期间年龄≤18岁、在独立的PTC或ATC接受治疗的穿透伤儿科患者。我们排除了在联合的PTC或ATC接受治疗、在医院之间转诊、头部有枪伤(GSW)或入院时死亡的患者。符合条件的患者有26276例(PTC组,n = 3737;ATC组,n = 22539)。主要结局是院内死亡率。次要结局是出院地点,作为功能结局的潜在替代指标。单因素和多因素分析评估创伤中心类型作为结局的独立危险因素。

结果

在ATC接受治疗的患者更有可能损伤严重程度评分>15、格拉斯哥昏迷量表<9、有GSW、心血管损伤和急诊手术(P < 0.001)。死亡率的调整优势比(OR)有利于PTC,但无统计学意义(OR,0.592;P = 0.054)。在亚组分析中,年龄≤12岁的儿童、有GSW损伤机制的儿童以及在PTC接受急诊手术的儿童与其他情况相比,更频繁地出院回家(OR,0.327、0.483和0.394;P值分别<0.001、<0.001和0.004)。

结论

穿透伤儿童无论在PTC还是ATC接受治疗,其生存结局相当。年龄较小的儿科患者在PTC接受治疗时可能有更好的功能结局。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验