A meta-analysis on anticoagulation after vascular trauma

In-Hospital Risk Factors for Reintervention and Amputation in Brachial Arterial Trauma

INTRODUCTION

Brachial artery trauma is a rare but potentially devastating injury. There is little data regarding risk factors for reintervention and amputation prevention in this population, as well as anticoagulant (AC) and antiplatelet (AP) regimens and outcomes after discharge in trauma patients with vascular injuries requiring repair. This study aims to identify in-hospital risk factors for reintervention and amputation and stratify outcomes of follow-up by discharge AC or AP regimen.

METHODS

The AAST Prospective Observational Vascular Injury Trial database was queried for all patients who underwent traumatic brachial arterial repair from 2013 to 2022. Patients were evaluated by need for reintervention, amputation, and outcomes at follow-up by AC or AP regimen.

RESULTS

Three hundred and eleven patients required brachial repair, 28 (9%) required reoperation, and 8 (2.6%) required amputation. High injury severity score and an increased number of packed red blood cells and platelets showed a significant increase for reoperation and amputation. Damage control and shunt use were significant for the need to reoperate. Seventy-four percent (221/298) of patients were discharged with postoperative AC or AP regimens. There was no significant difference of short-term follow-up by type of AC or AP regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

Damage control and temporary shunt may lead to additional operations but not an increase in amputations. However, anticoagulation intraoperatively and postoperatively does not appear to play a significant role in reducing reintervention. It also suggests that there is no increase in short-term follow-up complications with or without AC or AP therapy.

Postoperative antiplatelet and/or anticoagulation use does not impact complication or reintervention rates after vein repair of arterial injury: A PROOVIT study

INTRODUCTION

The use of antiplatelet (AP) and anticoagulation (AC) therapy after autogenous vein repair of traumatic arterial injury is controversial. The hypothesis in this study was that there is no difference in early postoperative outcomes regardless of whether AC, AP, both, or neither are used.

METHODS

The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment (PROOVIT) registry was queried from November, 2013, to January, 2019, for arterial injuries repaired with a vein graft. Demographics and injury characteristics were compared. Need for in-hospital reoperation was the primary outcome in this four-arm study, assessed with two ordinal logistic regression models (1. no therapy vs. AC only vs. AC and AP; 2. no therapy vs. AP only vs. AC and AP).

RESULTS

373 patients (52 no therapy, 88 AP only, 77 AC only, 156 both) from 19 centers with recorded Injury Severity Scores (ISS) were identified. Patients who received no therapy were younger than those who received AP (27.0 vs. 34.2, p = 0.02), had higher transfusion requirement (p < 0.01 between all groups) and a different distribution of anatomic injury (p < 0.01). After controlling for age, sex, ISS, platelet count, hemoglobin, pH, lactate, INR, transfusion requirement and anatomic location, there was no association with postoperative medical therapy and in-hospital operative reintervention, or any secondary outcome, including thrombosis (p = 0.67, p = 0.22).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither AC nor AP alone, nor in combination, impact complication rate after arterial repair with autologous vein. These patients can be safely treated with or without antithrombotics, recognizing that this study did not demonstrate a beneficial effect.