R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland Shock Trauma Center, Baltimore, MD.
Division of Surgical Critical Care and Trauma, Los Angeles County + University of Southern California Hospital, Los Angeles, CA.
J Am Coll Surg. 2018 May;226(5):730-740. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.01.044. Epub 2018 Feb 6.
Aortic occlusion is a potentially valuable tool for early resuscitation in patients nearing extremis or in arrest from severe hemorrhage.
The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma's Aortic Occlusion in Resuscitation for Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry identified trauma patients without penetrating thoracic injury undergoing aortic occlusion at the level of the descending thoracic aorta (resuscitative thoracotomy [RT] or zone 1 resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta [REBOA]) in the emergency department (ED). Survival outcomes relative to the timing of CPR need and admission hemodynamic status were examined.
Two hundred and eighty-five patients were included: 81.8% were males, with injury due to penetrating mechanisms in 41.4%; median age was 35.0 years (interquartile range 29 years) and median Injury Severity Score was 34.0 (interquartile range 18). Resuscitative thoracotomy was used in 71%, and zone 1 REBOA in 29%. Overall survival beyond the ED was 50% (RT 44%, REBOA 63%; p = 0.004) and survival to discharge was 5% (RT 2.5%, REBOA 9.6%; p = 0.023). Discharge Glasgow Coma Scale score was 15 in 85% of survivors. Prehospital CPR was required in 60% of patients with a survival beyond the ED of 37% and survival to discharge of 3% (all p > 0.05). Patients who did not require any CPR before had a survival beyond the ED of 70% (RT 48%, REBOA 93%; p < 0.001) and survival to discharge of 13% (RT 3.4%, REBOA 22.2%, p = 0.048). If aortic occlusion patients did not require CPR but presented with hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg; 9% [65% RT; 35% REBOA]), they achieved survival beyond the ED in 65% (p = 0.009) and survival to discharge of 15% (RT 0%, REBOA 44%; p = 0.008).
Overall, REBOA can confer a survival benefit over RT, particularly in patients not requiring CPR. Considerable additional study is required to definitively recommend REBOA for specific subsets of injured patients.
主动脉阻断是一种在接近危急或因严重出血而停搏的患者中进行早期复苏的潜在有价值的工具。
美国创伤外科学会的主动脉阻断在创伤和急性护理手术中的复苏中的主动脉阻断登记处确定了在急诊科进行降主动脉水平的主动脉阻断的没有穿透性胸部损伤的创伤患者(复苏性开胸术 [RT] 或区域 1 复苏性血管内球囊阻断主动脉 [REBOA])。检查了与心肺复苏需求和入院血流动力学状态相关的生存结果。
共纳入 285 例患者:81.8%为男性,穿透机制损伤占 41.4%;中位年龄为 35.0 岁(四分位间距 29 岁),损伤严重程度评分中位数为 34.0(四分位间距 18)。RT 使用率为 71%,区域 1 REBOA 使用率为 29%。ED 以外的总体生存率为 50%(RT 44%,REBOA 63%;p=0.004),出院生存率为 5%(RT 2.5%,REBOA 9.6%;p=0.023)。幸存者中 85%的格拉斯哥昏迷评分达到 15 分。有 60%的患者在 ED 以外需要院前心肺复苏,其生存率为 37%,出院生存率为 3%(均 p>0.05)。无需任何心肺复苏的患者 ED 以外生存率为 70%(RT 48%,REBOA 93%;p<0.001),出院生存率为 13%(RT 3.4%,REBOA 22.2%,p=0.048)。如果主动脉阻断患者无需心肺复苏但出现低血压(收缩压<90mmHg;9%[65%RT;35%REBOA]),则其 ED 以外生存率为 65%(p=0.009),出院生存率为 15%(RT 0%,REBOA 44%;p=0.008)。
总体而言,REBOA 可使 RT 患者的生存率提高,特别是在无需心肺复苏的患者中。需要进一步进行大量研究,以明确推荐将 REBOA 用于特定的创伤患者亚组。