Suppr超能文献

在杂交手术室中进行主动脉阻断治疗创伤和失血性休克的生存和神经结局。

Survival and neurologic outcomes following aortic occlusion for trauma and hemorrhagic shock in a hybrid operating room.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Florida Health, PO Box 100108, Gainesville, FL, 32610-0108, USA.

出版信息

World J Emerg Surg. 2023 Mar 23;18(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s13017-023-00484-w.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Outcomes following aortic occlusion for trauma and hemorrhagic shock are poor, leading some to question the clinical utility of aortic occlusion in this setting. This study evaluates neurologically intact survival following resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) versus resuscitative thoracotomy at a center with a dedicated trauma hybrid operating room with angiographic capabilities.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort analysis compared patients who underwent zone 1 aortic occlusion via resuscitative thoracotomy (n = 13) versus REBOA (n = 13) for blunt or non-thoracic, penetrating trauma and refractory hemorrhagic shock (systolic blood pressure less than 90 mmHg despite volume resuscitation) at a level 1 trauma center with a dedicated trauma hybrid operating room. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. The secondary outcome was neurologic status at hospital discharge, assessed by Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores.

RESULTS

Overall median age was 40 years, 27% had penetrating injuries, and 23% had pre-hospital closed-chest cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In both cohorts, median injury severity scores and head-abbreviated injury scores were 26 and 2, respectively. The resuscitative thoracotomy cohort had lower systolic blood pressure on arrival (0 [0-75] vs. 76 [65-99], p = 0.009). Hemorrhage control (systolic blood pressure 100 mmHg without ongoing vasopressor or transfusion requirements) was obtained in 77% of all REBOA cases and 8% of all resuscitative thoracotomy cases (p = 0.001). Survival to hospital discharge was greater in the REBOA cohort (54% vs. 8%, p = 0.030), as was discharge with GCS 15 (46% vs. 0%, p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing aortic occlusion for blunt or non-thoracic, penetrating trauma and refractory hemorrhagic shock at a center with a dedicated, trauma hybrid operating room, nearly half of all patients managed with REBOA had neurologically intact survival. The high death rate in resuscitative thoracotomy and differences in patient cohorts limit direct comparison.

摘要

背景

主动脉阻断治疗创伤和失血性休克的效果较差,这导致一些人质疑在这种情况下主动脉阻断的临床实用性。本研究评估了在配备血管造影功能的创伤杂交手术室的中心,使用复苏性主动脉球囊阻断(REBOA)与复苏性开胸术治疗创伤后神经功能完整的存活率。

方法

本回顾性队列分析比较了在配备血管造影功能的创伤杂交手术室的 1 级创伤中心,因钝性或非胸部、穿透性创伤和难治性失血性休克(尽管进行了容量复苏,但收缩压仍低于 90mmHg)而行主动脉 1 区阻断的患者,其中 13 例行复苏性开胸术(n=13),13 例行 REBOA(n=13)。主要结局为住院期间的存活率。次要结局为出院时的神经状态,通过格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)评分进行评估。

结果

总体中位年龄为 40 岁,27%为穿透性损伤,23%有院前闭式心肺复苏。在两个队列中,中位损伤严重程度评分和头部简略损伤评分分别为 26 和 2。复苏性开胸术组到达时的收缩压更低(0[0-75] vs. 76[65-99],p=0.009)。所有 REBOA 病例中有 77%的患者获得了出血控制(收缩压 100mmHg,无需持续使用血管加压药或输血),而所有复苏性开胸术病例中只有 8%的患者获得了出血控制(p=0.001)。REBOA 组的住院存活率更高(54% vs. 8%,p=0.030),出院时 GCS 评分为 15 分的患者比例也更高(46% vs. 0%,p=0.015)。

结论

在配备专用创伤杂交手术室的中心,因钝性或非胸部、穿透性创伤和难治性失血性休克而行主动脉阻断的患者中,近一半接受 REBOA 治疗的患者神经功能完整存活。复苏性开胸术的高死亡率和患者队列的差异限制了直接比较。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2cbd/10035182/badd6666e8f3/13017_2023_484_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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