Early mobilization of patients with non-operative liver and spleen injuries is safe and cost effective

Epidemiological profile of patients undergoing non-operative management of solid organ injury and associated factors with mortality

INTRODUCTION

Trauma primarily affects the economically active population, causing social and economic impact. The non-operative management of solid organ injuries aims to preserve organ function, reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with surgical interventions. The aim of study was to demonstrate the epidemiological profile of patients undergoing non-operative management in a trauma hospital and to evaluate factors associated with mortality in these patients.

METHODS

This is a historical cohort of patients undergoing non-operative management for solid organ injuries at a Brazilian trauma reference hospital between 2018 and 2022. Included were patients with blunt and penetrating trauma, analyzing epidemiological characteristics, blood transfusion, and association with the need for surgical intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 365 patients were included in the study. Three hundred and forty-three patients were discharged (93.97%), and the success rate of non-operative treatment was 84.6%. There was an association between mortality and the following associated injuries: hemothorax, sternal fracture, aortic dissection, and traumatic brain injury. There was an association between the need for transfusion and surgical intervention. Thirty-eight patients required some form of surgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

The profile of patients undergoing non-operative treatment consists of young men who are victims of blunt trauma. Non-operative treatment is safe and has a high success rate.

Association of early mobility with the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis and mortality among critically ill patients: a post hoc analysis of PREVENT trial

BACKGROUND

This study assessed the mobility levels among critically ill patients and the association of early mobility with incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of the multicenter PREVENT trial, which evaluated adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h and found no effect on the primary outcome of incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis. Mobility levels were documented daily up to day 28 in the ICU using a tool with an 8-point ordinal scale. We categorized patients according to mobility levels within the first 3 ICU days into three groups: early mobility level 4-7 (at least active standing), 1-3 (passive transfer from bed to chair or active sitting), and 0 (passive range of motion). We evaluated the association of early mobility and incident lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality by Cox proportional models adjusting for randomization and other co-variables.

RESULTS

Of 1708 patients, only 85 (5.0%) had early mobility level 4-7 and 356 (20.8%) level 1-3, while 1267 (74.2%) had early mobility level 0. Patients with early mobility levels 4-7 and 1-3 had less illness severity, femoral central venous catheters, and organ support compared to patients with mobility level 0. Incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis occurred in 1/85 (1.3%) patients in the early mobility 4-7 group, 7/348 (2.0%) patients in mobility 1-3 group, and 50/1230 (4.1%) patients in mobility 0 group. Compared with early mobility group 0, mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 were not associated with differences in incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 8.90; p = 0.87 and 0.91, 95% CI 0.39, 2.12; p = 0.83, respectively). However, early mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 had lower 90-day mortality (aHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 1.01; p = 0.052, and 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62; p < 0.0001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Only a small proportion of critically ill patients with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h were mobilized early. Early mobility was associated with reduced mortality, but not with different incidence of deep-vein thrombosis. This association does not establish causality, and randomized controlled trials are required to assess whether and to what extent this association is modifiable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).

Follow-up strategies for patients with splenic trauma managed non-operatively: the 2022 World Society of Emergency Surgery consensus document

Background

In 2017, the World Society of Emergency Surgery published its guidelines for the management of adult and pediatric patients with splenic trauma. Several issues regarding the follow-up of patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM remained unsolved.

Methods

Using a modified Delphi method, we sought to explore ongoing areas of controversy in the NOM of splenic trauma and reach a consensus among a group of 48 international experts from five continents (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, America) concerning optimal follow-up strategies in patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM.

Results

Consensus was reached on eleven clinical research questions and 28 recommendations with an agreement rate ≥ 80%. Mobilization after 24 h in low-grade splenic trauma patients (WSES Class I, AAST Grades I–II) was suggested, while in patients with high-grade splenic injuries (WSES Classes II–III, AAST Grades III–V), if no other contraindications to early mobilization exist, safe mobilization of the patient when three successive hemoglobins 8 h apart after the first are within 10% of each other was considered safe according to the panel. The panel suggests adult patients to be admitted to hospital for 1 day (for low-grade splenic injuries—WSES Class I, AAST Grades I–II) to 3 days (for high-grade splenic injuries—WSES Classes II–III, AAST Grades III–V), with those with high-grade injuries requiring admission to a monitored setting. In the absence of specific complications, the panel suggests DVT and VTE prophylaxis with LMWH to be started within 48–72 h from hospital admission. The panel suggests splenic artery embolization (SAE) as the first-line intervention in patients with hemodynamic stability and arterial blush on CT scan, irrespective of injury grade. Regarding patients with WSES Class II blunt splenic injuries (AAST Grade III) without contrast extravasation, a low threshold for SAE has been suggested in the presence of risk factors for NOM failure. The panel also suggested angiography and eventual SAE in all hemodynamically stable adult patients with WSES Class III injuries (AAST Grades IV–V), even in the absence of CT blush, especially when concomitant surgery that requires change of position is needed. Follow-up imaging with contrast-enhanced ultrasound/CT scan in 48–72 h post-admission of trauma in splenic injuries WSES Class II (AAST Grade III) or higher treated with NOM was considered the best strategy for timely detection of vascular complications.

Conclusion

This consensus document could help guide future prospective studies aiming at validating the suggested strategies through the implementation of prospective trauma databases and the subsequent production of internationally endorsed guidelines on the issue.

Non-operative management of blunt splenic trauma: evolution, results and controversies

The spleen is one of the most frequently affected organs in blunt abdominal trauma. Since Upadhyaya, the treatment of splenic trauma has undergone important changes. Currently, the consensus is that every splenic trauma presenting with hemodynamic stability should be initially treated nonoperatively, provided that the hospital has adequate structure and the patient does not present other conditions that indicate abdominal exploration. However, several topics regarding the nonoperative management (NOM) of splenic trauma are still controversial. Splenic angioembolization is a very useful tool for NOM, but there is no consensus on its precise indications. There is no definition in the literature as to how NOM should be conducted, neither about the periodicity of hematimetric control, the transfusion threshold that defines NOM failure, when to start venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, the need for control imaging, the duration of bed rest, and when it is safe to discharge the patient. The aim of this review is to make a critical analysis of the most recent literature on this topic, exposing the state of the art in the NOM of splenic trauma.

Splenic preservation after isolated splenic blunt trauma: The angioembolization paradox

BACKGROUND

The spleen is the most commonly injured organ in blunt abdominal trauma. The management for splenic trauma includes nonoperative management, splenectomy, and splenic artery angioembolization. The aim of this study is to investigate recent trends in the usage of splenic artery angioembolization in patients with isolated blunt splenic trauma.

METHODS

Adult patients (age >15) with isolated blunt splenic trauma were identified from the National Trauma Databank (2007-2015) using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes. The defined groups included nonoperative management, splenectomy, and splenic artery angioembolization. Patient variables collected included year of traumatic injury, age, sex, race, insurance status, and geographic region. Clinical variables collected included vital signs (systolic blood pressure, pulse, respiratory rate) recorded upon arrival to the emergency room, injury severity score, abbreviated injury severity scores, diagnoses, procedures, and mechanism. Outcome measures included mortality, hospital duration of stay, and complications. We performed 2 independent Poisson logistic regression models to assess relative risk for both splenectomy and angioembolization.

RESULTS

A total of 10,812 patients were included in the analysis (nonoperative management: 7,920; splenectomy: 2,083; angioembolization: 809). Angioembolization proportion increased from 2007 (4.6%) to 2015 (10%), while splenectomy proportion remained unchanged (19.2% to 18.3%). Poisson logistic regression suggests the adjusted probability of receiving angioembolization for a splenic injury increased year-to-year, while the adjusted probability of receiving a splenectomy remained unchanged.

CONCLUSION

The use of angioembolization for isolated blunt splenic injuries has increased over the past decade without a reciprocal change in splenectomy. Based on this study, angioembolization may be an overused resource without a significant benefit.

Impact of an early mobilization protocol on outcomes in trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit: A retrospective pre-post study

BACKGROUND

Prolonged immobility has detrimental consequences for critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Previous work has shown that early mobilization of ICU patients is a safe, feasible and effective strategy to improve outcomes; however, few of these studies focused on trauma ICU patients. Our objective was to assess the impact of implementing an ICU early mobilization protocol (EMP) on trauma outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective pre-post study of adult trauma patients (>18 years old) admitted to ICU at a Level I trauma center over a 2-year period prior to and following EMP implementation, allowing for a 1-year transition period. Data were collected from the Nova Scotia Trauma Registry. We compared outcomes (mortality, length of stay [LOS], ventilator-free days) between patients admitted during pre-EMP and post-EMP periods, and assessed for factors associated with outcomes using binary logistic regression and generalized linear models.

RESULTS

Overall, 526 patients were included in the analysis (292 pre-EMP, 234 post-EMP). Ages ranged from 18 years to 92 years (mean, 49.0 ± 20.4 years) and 74.3% were men. The post-EMP group had lower ICU mortality (21.6% vs. 12.8%; p = 0.009) and in-hospital mortality (25.3% vs. 17.5%; p = 0.031). After controlling for confounders, patients in the post-EMP group were less likely to die in the ICU (odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.79; p = 0.006) or in-hospital (odds ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval; 0.32-0.94; p = 0.03). In-hospital LOS, ICU LOS, ICU-free days, and number of ventilator-free days were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Trauma patients admitted to ICU during the post-EMP period had decreased odds of ICU mortality and in-hospital mortality. This is the first study to demonstrate a significant reduction in trauma mortality following implementation of an ICU mobility protocol.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, level III.

Early mobilization of trauma patients admitted to intensive care units: A systematic review and meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of early mobilization (EM) in trauma patients admitted to the ICU. Outcomes of interest included mortality, hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS), and duration of mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of 4 electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library) and the grey literature. Eligible study designs included randomized control trials, prospective cohorts, or retrospective cohorts. Studies must have compared EM to usual care (i.e., delayed or no mobilization) in trauma patients admitted to ICU. Overall, there were 2982 articles screened and 9 were included in the analysis. Two authors independently performed data extraction using a standardized form. Pertinent study design and population characteristics were recorded, as were prespecified outcome measures. Meta-analyses were performed using random effects models. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Study cohorts ranged from 15 to 1132 patients (median 63) and varied in their inclusion criteria. Most studies utilized a progressive mobility protocol as their intervention. Mortality was reported in 5 studies, of which 3 observed a lower rate with EM; however, meta-analysis showed no difference in mortality between patients mobilized early and those receiving usual care. Eight studies reported on LOS (in-hospital and ICU); although all 8 studies found EM reduced LOS, the difference in LOS was not significant on meta-analysis. Finally, 3 studies reported on ventilator days, all of which observed a reduction in the EM group. On meta-analysis, duration of mechanical ventilation was significantly lower with EM (mean difference -1.18 days, 95% CI, -2.17 - -0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

Few studies have investigated the effects of EM in trauma ICU patients. The available evidence suggests that patients who receive EM require fewer days of mechanical ventilation, but have similar mortality and LOS compared to those receiving usual care.