Godbole Moshumi, Olafson Samantha, Cohen Ryan B, Ward Candace L, Sailes Stephanie, Sharlin Mia, Parsikia Afshin, Moran Benjamin J, Leung Pak Shan P
General Surgery, Einstein Medical Center Philadelphia, Philadelphia, USA.
General Surgery, Einstein Healthcare Network, Philadelphia, USA.
Cureus. 2024 Mar 20;16(3):e56521. doi: 10.7759/cureus.56521. eCollection 2024 Mar.
Background Resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is performed in severe trauma cases as a final lifesaving effort. Prominent, yet differing, practice management guidelines exist from Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) and Western Trauma Association (WTA). This study evaluates all RTs performed from 2012 to 2019 at an urban Level 1 trauma center for management guideline indication and subsequent outcomes. Methods Our trauma registry was queried to identify RT cases from 2012 to 2019. Data was collected on patient demographics, prehospital presentation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) requirements, and resuscitation provided. Survival to the operating room, intensive care unit, and overall were recorded. Information was compared with regard to EAST and WTA criteria. Results Eighty-seven patients who underwent RTs were included. WTA guidelines were met in 78/87 (89.7%) of cases, comparatively EAST guidelines were met in every case. Within the EAST criteria, conditional and strong recommendations were met in 70/87 (80.4%) and 17/87 (19.5%) of cases, respectively. In nine cases (10.3%) indications were discordant, each meeting conditional indication by EAST and no indication by WTA. All patients that survived to the operating room (OR), ICU admission, and overall met EAST criteria. Conclusion All RTs performed at our Level 1 trauma center met indications provided by EAST criteria. WTA guidelines were not applicable in nine salvaging encounters due to the protracted duration of CPR before proceeding to RT. Furthermore, more patients that survived to OR and ICU admission met EAST guidelines suggesting an improved potential for patient survivability. As increased data is derived, management guidelines will likely be re-established for optimized patient outcomes.
背景 复苏性开胸手术(RT)用于严重创伤病例,作为最后的挽救生命的措施。东部创伤外科学会(EAST)和西部创伤协会(WTA)存在显著但不同的实践管理指南。本研究评估了2012年至2019年在一家城市一级创伤中心进行的所有复苏性开胸手术,以确定管理指南的适应证及后续结果。方法 我们查询了创伤登记系统,以识别2012年至2019年的复苏性开胸手术病例。收集了患者的人口统计学数据、院前表现、心肺复苏(CPR)需求及所提供的复苏情况。记录患者进入手术室、重症监护病房后的生存率及总体生存率。将信息与EAST和WTA标准进行比较。结果 纳入了87例行复苏性开胸手术的患者。87例中有78例(89.7%)符合WTA指南,相比之下,所有病例均符合EAST指南。在EAST标准中,分别有70/87(80.4%)和17/87(19.5%)的病例符合有条件推荐和强烈推荐。9例(10.3%)的适应证不一致,每例均符合EAST的有条件适应证,而不符合WTA的适应证。所有存活至手术室、入住重症监护病房及总体存活的患者均符合EAST标准。结论 我们一级创伤中心进行的所有复苏性开胸手术均符合EAST标准的适应证。由于在进行复苏性开胸手术前心肺复苏时间过长,WTA指南在9次挽救性手术中不适用。此外,更多存活至手术室和入住重症监护病房的患者符合EAST指南,表明患者生存潜力有所提高。随着数据的增加,可能会重新制定管理指南以优化患者预后。