From the Department of Surgery, Brooke Army Medical Center (D.W.S., D.S.K.), JBSA Fort Sam Houston; Army Institute of Surgical Research (D.S.K., R.D.G., I.A.P., M.D.P., B.S.K., M.A.D.), JBSA Fort Sam Houston, Houston, Texas; and Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (D.S.K.), Bethesda, Maryland.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020 Feb;88(2):292-297. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000002553.
Junctional hemorrhage is a leading contributor to battlefield mortality. The Abdominal Aortic and Junctional Tourniquet (AAJT) and infrarenal (zone III) resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) are emerging strategies for controlling junctional hemorrhage, with AAJT currently available in select forward deployed settings and increasing interest in applying REBOA in the military prehospital environment. This study compared the hemostatic, hemodynamic, and metabolic effects of these devices used for junctional hemorrhage control.
Shock was induced in anesthetized, mechanically ventilated swine with a controlled hemorrhage (20 mL/kg) and closed femur fracture followed by uncontrolled hemorrhage from a partial femoral artery transection (40% total hemorrhage volume). Residual femoral hemorrhage was recorded during 60-minute AAJT (n = 10) or zone III REBOA (n = 10) deployment, and the arterial injury was repaired subsequently. Animals were resuscitated with 15 mL/kg autologous whole blood and observed for 6 hours.
One animal in each group died during observation. Both devices achieved hemostasis with mean residual femoral blood loss in the AAJT and REBOA groups of 0.38 ± 0.59 mL/kg and 0.10 ± 0.07 mL/kg (p = 0.16), respectively, during the 60-minute intervention. The AAJT and REBOA augmented proximal blood pressure equally with AAJT allowing higher distal pressure than REBOA during intervention (p < 0.01). Following device deflation, AAJT animals had transiently lower mean arterial blood pressure than REBOA pigs (39 ± 6 vs. 54 ± 11 mm Hg p = 0.01). Both interventions resulted in similar degrees of lactic acidemia which resolved during observation. Similar cardiac and renal effects were observed between AAJT and REBOA.
The AAJT and REBOA produced similar hemostatic, resuscitative, and metabolic effects in this model of severe shock with junctional hemorrhage. Both interventions may have utility in future military medical operations.
交界处出血是战场死亡率的主要原因。腹主动脉和交界处止血带(AAJT)和肾下(区域 III)主动脉逆行球囊阻断复苏(REBOA)是控制交界处出血的新兴策略,AAJT 目前仅在选定的前伸部署环境中使用,并且越来越有兴趣将 REBOA 应用于军事现场前环境。本研究比较了这些用于控制交界处出血的设备的止血、血液动力学和代谢效果。
在麻醉、机械通气的猪中通过控制出血(20 毫升/公斤)和闭合股骨骨折,然后通过部分股动脉横断(总出血量的 40%)引起非控制出血来诱导休克。在 60 分钟的 AAJT(n=10)或区域 III REBOA(n=10)部署期间记录残余股动脉出血,随后修复动脉损伤。动物用 15 毫升/公斤自体全血复苏,并观察 6 小时。
每组各有一只动物在观察期间死亡。在 60 分钟的干预过程中,AAJT 和 REBOA 组的平均残余股动脉出血量分别为 0.38±0.59 毫升/公斤和 0.10±0.07 毫升/公斤(p=0.16),两组均达到止血效果。AAJT 和 REBOA 同样增加了近端血压,AAJT 在干预期间允许比 REBOA 更高的远端压力(p<0.01)。在设备放气后,AAJT 动物的平均动脉血压暂时低于 REBOA 猪(39±6 与 54±11 毫米汞柱,p=0.01)。两种干预措施均导致相似程度的乳酸酸中毒,在观察期间得到解决。AAJT 和 REBOA 之间观察到相似的心脏和肾脏效应。
在这种严重休克伴交界处出血的模型中,AAJT 和 REBOA 产生了相似的止血、复苏和代谢效果。这两种干预措施都可能在未来的军事医疗行动中发挥作用。