Department of Trauma Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam-The Netherlands.
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2022 Jul;28(7):954-959. doi: 10.14744/tjtes.2021.14826.
In more than 60 countries worldwide, laboratory testing plays a challenging and expensive role in trauma resus-citation. In 1995, the literature already suggested that routine laboratory testing may not be useful for most trauma patients. Our study hypothesized that still the need for some laboratory tests perhaps should be reconsidered. Therefore, the aim of this study was to create more insight in the distribution between normal and abnormal parameters for routine laboratory testing in trauma patient management.
This retrospective analysis was performed at Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, an academic level 1 trauma center. Data concerning age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical state classification system (ASA), Injury Severity Scores, Glasgow Coma Scales, mechanism of injury, presence of high-energy trauma, and type of injury (blunt or penetrating) were obtained. Laboratory parameters included comprehensive hematology, coagulation, arterial blood gas, kidney, and liver blood panels. Analytical focus was paid to the patient's vital status, the indication for an emergency intervention, and the risk of in-hospital mortality.
A total of 1287 patients were included in the study. Patients with unstable vital signs or who required emergency inter-vention were most often dealing with abnormalities in pO2, glucose, D-dimer, creatinine, and alcohol values. Mean corpuscular volume (MCV), international normalized ratio (INR), fibrinogen, and amylase were obtained in more than 80% of the patients, but in specific patient groups only abnormal in less than 9%.
Trauma patients suffer mainly from abnormal values of D-dimer, pO2, glucose, creatinine, and alcohol. By contrast, MCV, INR, amylase, fibrinogen, and thrombocytes are regularly obtained as well, but only abnormal in a small amount of trauma patients. These findings suggest reconsiderations and more accuracy in the performance of laboratory testing, especially for trauma patients with stable vital signs.
在全球超过 60 个国家,实验室检测在创伤复苏中扮演着具有挑战性和昂贵的角色。早在 1995 年,文献就表明,对于大多数创伤患者,常规实验室检测可能没有用处。我们的研究假设,某些实验室检测的需求或许仍需重新考虑。因此,本研究旨在深入了解创伤患者管理中常规实验室检测的正常和异常参数分布。
本回顾性分析在阿姆斯特丹 UMC,AMC 院区进行,该院区是一家学术水平 1 级创伤中心。获取的数据包括年龄、性别、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)身体状况分类系统(ASA)、损伤严重程度评分、格拉斯哥昏迷评分、损伤机制、高能创伤的存在以及损伤类型(钝性或穿透性)。实验室参数包括全面的血液学、凝血、动脉血气、肾脏和肝脏血液学检查。分析重点关注患者的生命体征、紧急干预的指征以及住院死亡率的风险。
共有 1287 名患者纳入本研究。生命体征不稳定或需要紧急干预的患者,pO2、葡萄糖、D-二聚体、肌酐和酒精值异常的情况更为常见。平均红细胞体积(MCV)、国际标准化比值(INR)、纤维蛋白原和淀粉酶在超过 80%的患者中获得,但在特定患者群体中,异常值不到 9%。
创伤患者主要表现为 D-二聚体、pO2、葡萄糖、肌酐和酒精值异常。相比之下,MCV、INR、淀粉酶、纤维蛋白原和血小板也经常获得,但只有一小部分创伤患者异常。这些发现表明,特别是对于生命体征稳定的创伤患者,实验室检测的实施需要重新考虑和提高准确性。