The need for a rapid transfer to a hybrid operating theatre: Do we lose benefit with poor efficiency?

PURPOSE

Recent studies on hybrid operating rooms (ORs) have mainly reported their applications in orthopaedic surgery and interventional radiology (IR); there are few studies assessing severely injured patients who underwent IR or surgery in hybrid ORs for haemostasis. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate our early experience with the use of hybrid OR to control haemorrhage in severe trauma patients.

METHODS

Medical charts of patients who underwent an emergency surgery or IR for haemostasis were analysed retrospectively between January and December 2015.

RESULTS

Of the 95 patients directly transported to the general or hybrid OR, 69 (73%) were transported to the non-hybrid OR and underwent emergency surgeries, whereas 26 (27%) were transported to the hybrid OR and underwent emergency IR or surgery on-site. Patients transported to the hybrid OR had a higher median Injury Severity Score (median: 29, interquartile range[IQR]: 21-36.5 vs median: 21, IQR: 16-27) and lower median initial systolic blood pressure (median: 96, IQR: 82.75-128.75 vs median: 114, IQR: 95-151.5) than those transported to the non-hybrid OR. The median time from the emergency room (ER) arrival to the start of the emergency procedure in the hybrid OR group was similar with that in the non-hybrid OR group (median: 80, IQR: 62.75-91.5 vs median: 75, IQR: 56.5-99). Seven patients underwent IR and surgery concurrently in the hybrid OR because of a haemodynamically unstable pelvic fracture, severe liver injury, and severe brain haemorrhage. The median time from the ER arrival to the start of the haemostatic procedure or operation was 64(43-97) minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the hybrid OR may be used for haemostasis in severely injured patients, the long median time from ER arrival to the start of a haemostatic procedure in hybrid OR indicates the need for a new workflow to reduce this time and to facilitate hybrid OR use.