Association of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) and mortality in penetrating trauma patients

The Role of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has been utilized by trauma surgeons at the bedside for over a decade in both civilian and military settings. Both translational and clinical research suggest it is superior to resuscitative thoracotomy for specific patient populations. Technological advancements in recent years have significantly enhanced the safety profile of REBOA. Resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta has also swiftly found implementation in patients in shock from non-traumatic hemorrhage.

Is REBOA the Last Card to Control a Massive Gastrointestinal Bleeding?

INTRODUCTION

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a potential tool for the management of massive gastrointestinal bleeding (MGB). This study aims to describe the experience of the use of REBOA as adjunctive therapy in patients with MGB and to evaluate its effectiveness.

METHODS

Serial cases of patients with hemorrhagic shock secondary to MGB in whom REBOA was placed were collected. Patient demographics, bleeding severity, etiology, management, and clinical outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

Between 2017 and 2020, five cases were analyzed. All patients had a severe gastrointestinal bleeding (Glasgow Blatchford Bleeding Score range 12-17; Clinical Rockal Score range 5-9). The etiologies of MGB were perforated gastric or duodenal ulcers, esophageal varices, and vascular lesions. Systolic blood pressure increased after REBOA placement and total occlusion time was 25-60 min. REBOA provided temporary hemorrhage control in all cases and allowed additional hemostatic maneuvers to be performed. Three patients survived more than 24 h. All patients died in index hospitalization. The main cause of death was related to hemorrhagic shock.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular aortic occlusion can work as a bridge to further resuscitation and attempts at hemostasis in patients with MGB. REBOA provides hemodynamic support and may be used simultaneously with other hemostatic maneuvers, facilitating definitive hemorrhage control.

Balloon Rises Above: REBOA at Zone 1 May Be Superior to Resuscitative Thoracotomy

BACKGROUND

The use of Zone 1 REBOA for life-threatening trauma has increased dramatically.

STUDY DESIGN

The Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery database was queried for blunt and penetrating trauma between 2013 and 2021. Outcomes were examined both for mechanisms of injury combined and separately and for combinations of abdominal injury with and without traumatic brain injury and chest injuries (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] score >2).

RESULTS

A total of 531 patients underwent REBOA (408 with blunt injury and 123 with penetrating injury) and 1,603 (595 with blunt injury and 1,008 with penetrating injury) underwent resuscitative thoracotomy (RT). Mean age was 38.5 ± 16 years and mean injury severity score was 34.5 ± 21; 57.7% had chest AIS score of more than 2, 21.8% had head AIS score of more than 2, and 37.3% had abdominal AIS score of more than 2. Admission Glasgow Coma Scale was 4.9 + 4, and systolic blood pressure at aortic occlusion (AO) was 22 + 40 mmHg. No differences in outcomes in REBOA or RT patients were identified between institutions (p > 0.5). After inverse probability weighting, Glasgow Coma Scale, age, injury severity score, systolic blood pressure at AO, CPR at AO, and blood product transfusion, REBOA was superior to RT in both blunt (odds ratio [OR] 4.7, 95% CI 1.9 to 11.7) and penetrating (OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.7 to 14) injuries, across all spectrums of injury (p < 0.01). Overall mortality was significantly higher for AO more than 90 minutes compared with less than 30 minutes in blunt (OR 4.6, 95% CI 1.5 to 15) and penetrating (OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 25) injuries. Duration of AO more than 60 minutes was significantly associated with mortality after penetrating abdominal injury (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.1 to 22) and abdomen and head (OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.6 to 18).

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital survival is higher for patients undergoing REBOA than RT for all injury patterns. Complete AO by REBOA or RT should be limited to less than 30 minutes. Neither hospital and procedure volume nor trauma verification level impacts outcomes for REBOA or RT.

Management of non-compressible torso hemorrhage of the abdomen in civilian and military austere environments: a scoping review

Background

Non-compressible abdominal hemorrhage (NCAH) is the leading cause of potentially preventable deaths in both civilian and military austere environments, and an improvement in mortality due to this problem has not been demonstrated during the past quarter century. Several innovations have been developed to control hemorrhage closer to the point of injury.

Objective

This review assessed NCAH interventions in civilian and military settings, focusing on austere environments. It identified innovations, effectiveness, and knowledge gaps for future research.

Methodology

The Joanna Briggs Institute for Evidence Synthesis methodology guided this scoping review to completion. Studies evaluating NCAH with human participants in civilian and military austere environments that were eligible for inclusion were limited to English language studies published between December 1990 and January 2023. The PCC (Participant, Concept, Context) framework was used for data synthesis. Deductive and inductive thematic analyses were used to assess the literature that met inclusion criteria, identify patterns/themes to address the research questions and identify common themes within the literature. A stakeholder consultation was conducted to review and provide expert perspectives and opinions on the results of the deductive and inductive thematic analyses.

Results

The literature search identified 868 articles; 26 articles met the inclusion criteria. Textual narrative analysis of the 26 articles resulted in the literature addressing four main categories: NCAH, penetrating abdominal trauma, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA), and ResQFoam. The deductive thematic analysis aimed to answer three research questions. Research question 1 addressed the effectiveness of REBOA, damage control resuscitation, and damage control surgery in managing NCAH in austere environments. No effectiveness studies were found on this topic. Research question 2 identified three knowledge gaps in NCAH management in austere environments. The analysis identified early hemorrhage control, prehospital provider decision-making ability, and REBOA implementation as knowledge gaps in NCAH. Research question 3 identified five innovations that may affect the management of NCAH in the future: transport of patients, advanced resuscitative care, expert consultation, REBOA implementation, and self-expanding foam implementation. The inductive thematic analysis resulted in four recurrent themes from the literature: prehospital care, decision-making, hemorrhage control, and mortality in NCAH. During the stakeholders' consultation, the results of the deductive and inductive thematic analyses were reviewed and agreed on by the stakeholders. Special emphasis and discussion were given to prehospital management, expert opinions in the prehospital environment, decision-making in the prehospital environment, transport and resuscitation in the prehospital setting, REBOA, alternative discussion for research, and research gaps.

Conclusion

NCAH is still a significant cause of preventable death in both military and civilian austere environments, even with ongoing research and interventions aimed at extending survival in such conditions. This scoping review has identified several potential concepts that could reduce the mortality associated with a preventable cause of death due to hemorrhage in austere environments.

Resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta in the modern era: Expanding indications, optimal techniques, unresolved issues, and current results

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta has been used by trauma surgeons at the bedside for more than a decade in civilian and military settings. Translational and clinical research suggests it is superior to resuscitative thoracotomy for select patients. Clinical research suggests outcomes are superior in patients who received resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta compared with those who did not. Technology has advanced considerably in the past several years, leading to the improved safety profile and wider adoption of resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta. In addition to trauma patients, resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta has been rapidly implemented for patient with nontraumatic hemorrhage.

A comparison of mortality and indicators of treatment success of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of aorta (REBOA): a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Emergency resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is a recognised method of controlling non-compressible torso haemorrhage (NCTH) often in adjunct to emergency surgery. Recently, there is much debate regarding resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of aorta (REBOA) on its role in civilian trauma cases in controlling NCTH. This study aims to provide an updated review on in-hospital mortality rates in patients who underwent REBOA versus RT and standard care without REBOA (non-REBOA) and to identify the potential indicators of REBOA survival.

Methods

Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were used to perform the study. All adult trauma cases were included, while pre-hospital, military and non-English studies were excluded. A literature search was done on studies from 01 January 2005 to 30 June 2020 using EMBASE, MEDLINE and COCHRANE databases. Risk of bias was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies (MINORS) tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model and the DerSimonian and Laird estimation method. A significance level of p < 0.05 was used.

Results

Twenty-five studies were included in this study. The odds of in-hospital mortality of patients who underwent REBOA compared to RT was 0.18 (p < 0.01, 0.12-0.26). The odds of in-hospital survival of patients who underwent REBOA compared to non-REBOA was 1.28 (p = 0.62, 0.46-3.53). There was a significant difference found between survivors and non-survivors in terms of their pre-REBOA systolic blood pressure (SBP) (19.26 mmHg, p < 0.01), post-REBOA SBP (20.73 mmHg, p < 0.01), duration of aortic occlusion (- 40.57 min, p < 0.01) and injury severity score (- 8.50, p < 0.01).

Conclusions

REBOA has a potential for wider application in civilian settings, with our study demonstrating lower in-hospital mortality compared to RT. Prospective multi-centre studies are needed for further evaluation of the indications and feasibility of REBOA.Level of Evidence + Study Type: Level IV. Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12055-022-01413-3.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in civilian pre-hospital care: a systematic review of the literature

Background

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a damage control tool with a potential role in the hemodynamic resuscitation of severely ill patients in the civilian pre-hospital setting. REBOA ensures blood flow to vital organs by early proximal control of the source of bleeding. However, there is no consensus on the use of REBOA in the pre-hospital setting. This article aims to perform a systematic review of the literature about the feasibility, survival, indications, complications, and potential candidates for civilian pre-hospital REBOA.

Methods

A literature search was conducted using Medline, EMBASE, LILACS and Web of Science databases. Primary outcome variables included overall survival and feasibility. Secondary outcome variables included complications and potential candidates for endovascular occlusion.

Results

The search identified 8 articles. Five studies described the use of REBOA in pre-hospital settings, reporting a total of 47 patients in whom the procedure was attempted. Pre-hospital REBOA was feasible in 68–100% of trauma patients and 100% of non-traumatic patients with cardiac arrest. Survival rates and complications varied widely. Pre-hospital REBOA requires a coordinated and integrated emergency health care system with a well-trained and equipped team. The remaining three studies performed a retrospective analysis identifying 784 potential REBOA candidates.

Conclusions

Pre-hospital REBOA could be a feasible intervention for a significant portion of severely ill patients in the civilian setting. However, the evidence is limited. The impact of pre-hospital REBOA should be assessed in future studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40001-022-00836-3.

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta in Penetrating Trauma

BACKGROUND

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) achieves temporary hemorrhage control via aortic occlusion. Existing REBOA literature focuses on blunt trauma without a clearly defined role in penetrating trauma. This study compared clinical/injury data and outcomes after REBOA in penetrating vs blunt trauma.

STUDY DESIGN

All patients in the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (AORTA) database, an observational American Association for the Surgery of Trauma dataset of trauma patients requiring aortic occlusion, who underwent REBOA were included (January 2014 through February 2021). Study groups were defined by mechanism: penetrating vs blunt. Subgroup analysis was performed of patients arriving with vital signs. Univariable/multivariable analyses compared injuries and outcomes.

RESULTS

Seven hundred fifty-nine patients underwent REBOA: 152 (20%) penetrating and 607 (80%) blunt. Patients undergoing penetrating REBOA were less severely injured (injury severity score 25 vs 34; p < 0.001). The most common hemorrhage source was abdominal in penetrating REBOA (79%) and pelvic in blunt REBOA (31%; p = 0.002). Penetrating REBOA was more likely to occur in the operating room (36% vs 17%) and less likely in the emergency department (63% vs 81%; p < 0.001). Penetrating REBOA used more zone I balloon deployment (76% vs 64%) and less zone III (19% vs 34%; p = 0.001). Improved or stabilized hemodynamics were less frequent after penetrating REBOA (41% vs 62%, p < 0.001; 23% vs 41%, p < 0.001). On subgroup analysis of patients arriving alive, improvement or stabilization in hemodynamics was similar between groups (87% vs 86%, p = 0.388; 77% vs 72%, p = 0.273). Penetrating REBOA was not independently associated with mortality (odds ratio 1.253; p = 0.776).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite lower injury severity, REBOA was significantly less likely to improve or stabilize hemodynamics after penetrating trauma. Among patients arriving alive, however, outcomes were comparable, suggesting that penetrating REBOA may be most beneficial among patients with vital signs. Because hemorrhage source, catheter insertion setting, and deployment zone varied significantly between groups, existing blunt REBOA data may not be appropriately extrapolated to penetrating trauma. Further study of REBOA as a means of aortic occlusion in penetrating trauma is needed.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) may be superior to resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI)

Background

The effects of aortic occlusion (AO) on brain injury are not well defined. We examined the impact of AO by resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) and resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) on outcomes in the setting of traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Methods

Patients sustaining TBI who underwent RT or REBOA in zone 1 (thoracic aorta) from September 2013 to December 2018 were identified. The indication for REBOA or RT was hemodynamic collapse due to hemorrhage below the diaphragm. Primary outcomes included mortality and systemic complications.

Results

282 patients underwent REBOA or RT. Of these, 76 had mild TBI (40 REBOA, 36 RT) and 206 sustained severe TBI (107 REBOA, 99 RT). Overall, the mean (±SD) age was 42±17 years, with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 40±17 and mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) at the time of REBOA or RT of 81±34 mm Hg. REBOA patients had a mean SBP at the time of AO of 78.39±29.45 mm Hg, whereas RT patients had a mean SBP of 83.18±37.87 mm Hg at the time of AO (p=0.24). 55% had ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) at the time of AO, and the in-hospital mortality was 86%. Binomial logistic regression controlling for TBI severity, age, ISS, SBP at the time of AO, crystalloid infusion, and CPR during AO demonstrated that the odds of mortality are 3.1 times higher for RT compared with REBOA. No significant differences were found in systemic complications between RT and REBOA.

Discussion

Patients with TBI who receive REBOA may have improved survival, but no difference in systemic complications, compared with patients who receive RT for the same indication. Although some patients are receiving RT prior to arrest for extrathoracic hemorrhagic shock, these results suggest that REBOA should be considered as an alternative to RT when RT is chosen for the sole purpose of resuscitation in the setting of TBI.

Level of evidence

4.

Damage control in abdominal vascular trauma

In patients with abdominal trauma who require laparotomy, up to a quarter or a third will have a vascular injury. The venous structures mainly injured are the vena cava (29%) and the iliac veins (20%), and arterial vessels are the iliac arteries (16%) and the aorta (14%). The initial approach is performed following the ATLS principles. This manuscript aims to present the surgical approach to abdominal vascular trauma following damage control principles. The priority in a trauma laparotomy is bleeding control. Hemorrhages of intraperitoneal origin are controlled by applying pressure, clamping, packing, and retroperitoneal with selective pressure. After the temporary bleeding control is achieved, the compromised vascular structure must be identified, according to the location of the hematomas. The management of all lesions should be oriented towards the expeditious conclusion of the laparotomy, focusing efforts on the bleeding control and contamination, with a postponement of the definitive management. Their management of vascular injuries includes ligation, transient bypass, and packing of selected low-pressure vessels and bleeding surfaces. Subsequently, the unconventional closure of the abdominal cavity should be performed, preferably with negative pressure systems, to reoperate once the hemodynamic alterations and coagulopathy have been corrected to carry out the definitive management.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in patients with major trauma and uncontrolled haemorrhagic shock: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Background

Multiple studies regarding the use of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) in patients with non-compressible torso injuries and uncontrolled haemorrhagic shock were recently published. To date, the clinical evidence of the efficacy of REBOA is still debated. We aimed to conduct a systematic review assessing the clinical efficacy and safety of REBOA in patients with major trauma and uncontrolled haemorrhagic shock.

Methods

We systematically searched MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE and CENTRAL up to June 2020. All randomized controlled trials and observational studies that investigated the use of REBOA compared to resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) with/without REBOA or no-REBOA were eligible.

We followed the PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Two authors independently extracted data and appraised the risk of bias of included studies. Effect sizes were pooled in a meta-analysis using random-effects models. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Primary outcomes were mortality, volume of infused blood components, health-related quality of life, time to haemorrhage control and any adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were improvement in haemodynamic status and failure/success of REBOA technique.

Results

We included 11 studies (5866 participants) ranging from fair to good quality. REBOA was associated with lower mortality when compared to RT (aOR 0.38; 95% CI 0.20–0.74), whereas no difference was observed when REBOA was compared to no-REBOA (aOR 1.40; 95% CI 0.79–2.46). No significant difference in health-related quality of life between REBOA and RT (p = 0.766). The most commonly reported complications were amputation, haematoma and pseudoaneurysm. Sparse data and heterogeneity of reporting for all other outcomes prevented any estimate.

Conclusions

Our findings on overall mortality suggest a positive effect of REBOA among non-compressible torso injuries when compared to RT but no differences compared to no-REBOA. Variability in indications and patient characteristics prevents any conclusion deserving further investigation. REBOA should be promoted in specific training programs in an experimental setting in order to test its effectiveness and a randomized trial should be planned.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13017-021-00386-9.

Damage control surgery in lung trauma

Damage control techniques applied to the management of thoracic injuries have evolved over the last 15 years. Despite the limited number of publications, information is sufficient to scatter some fears and establish management principles. The severity of the anatomical injury justifies the procedure of damage control in only few selected cases. In most cases, the magnitude of the physiological derangement and the presence of other sources of bleeding within the thoracic cavity or in other body compartments constitutes the indication for the abbreviated procedure. The classification of lung injuries as peripheral, transfixing, and central or multiple, provides a guideline for the transient bleeding control and for the definitive management of the injury: pneumorraphy, wedge resection, tractotomy or anatomical resection, respectively.

Identification of specific patterns such as the need for resuscitative thoracotomy, or aortic occlusion, the existence of massive hemothorax, a central lung injury, a tracheobronchial injury, a major vascular injury, multiple bleeding sites as well as the recognition of hypothermia, acidosis or coagulopathy, constitute the indication for a damage control thoracotomy. In these cases, the surgeon executes an abbreviated procedure with packing of the bleeding surfaces, primary management with packing of some selected peripheral or transfixing lung injuries, and the postponement of lung resection, clamping of the pulmonary hilum in the most selective way possible. The abbreviation of the thoracotomy closure is achieved by suturing the skin over the wound packed, or by installing a vacuum system. The management of the patient in the intensive care unit will allow identification of those who require urgent reintervention and the correction of the physiological derangement in the remaining patients for their scheduled reintervention and definitive management.

Use of REBOA in the universe of magical realism: a real-world review

While reading the novella “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” by the Colombian Nobel Laureate Gabriel García-Marquez, we were surprised to realize that the injuries sustained by the main character could have been successfully treated had he received modern trauma care in which REBOA may have been considered. This is a discussion of Mr. Nasar's murder to explore whether he could have been saved by deploying REBOA as a surgical adjunct to bleeding control and resuscitation. In reading García-Marquez's novel we noted the events that unfolded at the time of Santiago Nasar's murder. To contextualize the claim that Mr. Nasar could have survived, had his injuries been treated with REBOA, we explored and illustrated what could have done differently and why. On the day of his death, Mr. Nasar sustained multiple penetrating stab wounds. Although he received multiple stab wounds to his torso, the book describes seven potentially fatal injuries, resulting in hollow viscus, solid viscus, and major vascular injuries. We provided a practical description of the clinical and surgical management algorithm we would have followed in Mr. Nasar's case. This algorithm included the REBOA deployment for hemorrhage control and resuscitation. The use of REBOA as part of the surgical procedures performed could have saved Mr. Nasar's life. Based on our current knowledge about REBOA in trauma surgery, we claim that its use, coupled with appropriate surgical care for hemorrhage control, could have saved Santiago Nasar's life, and thus prevent a death foretold.

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA): update and insights into current practices and future directions for research and implementation

Background

In this review, we assess the state of Resuscitative Endovascular Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) today with respect to out-of-hospital (OOH) vs. inhospital (H) use in blunt and penetrating trauma, as well as discuss areas of promising research that may be key in further advancement of REBOA applications.

Methods

To analyze the trends in REBOA use, we conducted a review of the literature and identified articles with human or animal data that fit the respective inclusion and exclusion criteria. In separate tables, we compiled data extracted from selected articles in categories including injury type, zone and duration of REBOA, setting in which REBOA was performed, sample size, age, sex and outcome. Based on these tables as well as more detailed review of some key cases of REBOA usage, we assessed the current state of REBOA as well as coagulation and histological disturbances associated with its usage. All statistical tests were 2-sided using an alpha=0.05 for significance. Analysis was done using SAS 9.5 (Cary, NC). Tests for significance was done with a t-test for continuous data and a Chi Square Test for categorical data.

Results

In a total of 44 cases performed outside of a hospital in both military and civilian settings, the overall survival was found to be 88.6%, significantly higher than the 50.4% survival calculated from 1,807 cases of REBOA performed within a hospital (p<.0001). We observe from human data a propensity to use Zone I in penetrating trauma and Zone III in blunt injuries. We observe lower final metabolic markers in animal studies with shorter REBOA time and longer follow-up times.

Conclusions

Further research related to human use of REBOA must be focused on earlier initiation of REBOA after injury which may depend on development of rapid vascular access devices and techniques more so than on any new improvements in REBOA. Future animal studies should provide detailed multisystem organ assessment to accurately define organ injury and metabolic burden associated with REBOA application. Overall, animal studies must involve realistic models of injury with severe clinical scenarios approximating human trauma and exsanguination, especially with long-term follow-up after injury.

Damage control resuscitation: REBOA as the new fourth pillar

Damage Control Resuscitation (DCR) seeks to combat metabolic decompensation of the severely injured trauma patient by battling on three major fronts: Permissive Hypotension, Hemostatic Resuscitation, and Damage Control Surgery (DCS). The aim of this article is to perform a review of the history of DCR/DCS and to propose a new paradigm that has emerged from the recent advancements in endovascular technology: The Resuscitative Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA). Thanks to the advances in technology, a bridge has been created between Pre-hospital Management and the Control of Bleeding described in Stage I of DCS which is the inclusion and placement of a REBOA. We have been able to show that REBOA is not only a tool that aids in the control of hemorrhage, it is also a vital tool in the hemodynamic resuscitation of a severely injured blunt and/or penetrating trauma patient. That is why we propose a new paradigm “The Fourth Pillar”: Permissive Hypotension, Hemostatic Resuscitation, Damage Control Surgery and REBOA.

Damage control surgery: a constant evolution

The story of trauma resuscitation is similar to that of many other advances in medicine: described, forgotten, reinvented, ridiculed, and finally accepted. Even after acceptance, the concepts go through periods of neglect and indifference before they are tried and enhanced, till the next advance. Damage control, a strategy for management of critically injured or ill patients, is a prime example of this phenomenon. It reminds us of the famous words of Oliver Goldsmith in 1761: “for he who fights and runs away, will live to fight another day, but he who is in battle slain, will never rise and fight again”. Damage control was based on the recognition of the lethal triad of hypothermia, acidosis, and a coagulopathy resulting from massive blood loss, large-volume resuscitation and ischemia-reperfusion. It was an approach that J. Hogarth Pringle from Glasgow, Scotland, suggested in 1908 with his principles of compression and hepatic packing for control of venous hemorrhage from the injured liver: temporary, expeditious and effective. Packing, however, was rarely utilized during World War II and the Vietnam War because of the presumed risk of rebleeding with removal of the packs. The ever-difficult challenge of “non-surgical bleeding” from a coagulopathy due to massive hepatic injuries did, eventually, lead to a resurrection of the concept of perihepatic packing in the 1980s in civilian centers and became one of the initial steps in damage control for patients with severe and/or multiple intra-abdominal injuries.

REBOA as a New Damage Control Component in Hemodynamically Unstable Noncompressible Torso Hemorrhage Patients

Noncompressible torso hemorrhage is one of the leading causes of preventable death worldwide. An efficient and appropriate evaluation of the trauma patient with ongoing hemorrhage is essential to avoid the development of the lethal diamond (hypothermia, coagulopathy, hypocalcemia, and acidosis). Currently, the initial management strategies include permissive hypotension, hemostatic resuscitation, and damage control surgery. However, recent advances in technology have opened the doors to a wide variety of endovascular techniques that achieve these goals with minimal morbidity and limited access. An example of such advances has been the introduction of the Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA), which has received great interest among trauma surgeons around the world due to its potential and versatility in areas such as trauma, gynecology & obstetrics and gastroenterology. This article aims to describe the experience earned in the use of REBOA in noncompressible torso hemorrhage patients. Our results show that REBOA can be used as a new component in the damage control resuscitation of the severely injured trauma patient. To this end, we propose two new deployment algorithms for hemodynamically unstable noncompressible torso hemorrhage patients: one for blunt and another for penetrating trauma. We acknowledge that REBOA has its limitations, which include a steep learning curve, its inherent cost and availability. Although to reach the best outcomes with this new technology, it must be used in the right way, by the right surgeon with the right training and to the right patient.

Outcomes and management approaches of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta based on the income of countries

Background

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) could provide a survival benefit to severely injured patients as it may improve their initial ability to survive the hemorrhagic shock. Although the evidence supporting the use of REBOA is not conclusive, its use has expanded worldwide. We aim to compare the management approaches and clinical outcomes of trauma patients treated with REBOA according to the countries’ income based on the World Bank Country and Lending Groups.

Methods

We used data from the AORTA (USA) and the ABOTrauma (multinational) registries. Patients were stratified into two groups: (1) high-income countries (HICs) and (2) low-to-middle income countries (LMICs). Propensity score matching extracted 1:1 matched pairs of subjects who were from an LMIC or a HIC based on age, gender, the presence of pupillary response on admission, impeding hypotension (SBP ≤ 80), trauma mechanism, ISS, the necessity of CPR on arrival, the location of REBOA insertion (emergency room or operating room) and the amount of PRBCs transfused in the first 24 h. Logistic regression (LR) was used to examine the association of LMICs and mortality.

Results

A total of 817 trauma patients from 14 countries were included. Blind percutaneous approach and surgical cutdown were the preferred means of femoral cannulation in HICs and LIMCs, respectively. Patients from LMICs had a significantly higher occurrence of MODS and respiratory failure. LR showed no differences in mortality for LMICs when compared to HICs; neither in the non-matched cohort (OR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.36‑1.09; p = 0.1) nor in the matched cohort (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 0.63‑3,33; p = 0.3).

Conclusion

There is considerable variation in the management practices of REBOA and the outcomes associated with this intervention between HICs and LMICs. Although we found significant differences in multiorgan and respiratory failure rates, there were no differences in the risk-adjusted odds of mortality between the groups analyzed. Trauma surgeons practicing REBOA around the world should joint efforts to standardize the practice of this endovascular technology worldwide.

The use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) for non-traumatic cardiac arrest: A review

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has been proposed as a novel approach to managing non-traumatic cardiac arrest (NTCA). During cardiac arrest, cardiac output ceases and perfusion of vital organs is compromised. Traditional advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) measures and cardiopulmonary resuscitation are often unable to achieve return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). During insertion of REBOA a balloon-tipped catheter is placed into the femoral artery and advanced in a retrograde manner into the aorta while the patient is undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The balloon is then inflated to fully occlude the aorta. The literature surrounding the use of aortic occlusion in non-traumatic cardiac arrest is limited to animal studies, case reports and one recent non-controlled feasibility trial. In both human and animal studies, preliminary data show that REBOA may improve coronary and cerebral perfusion pressures and key physiologic parameters during cardiac arrest resuscitation, and animal data have demonstrated improved rates of ROSC. Multiple questions remain before REBOA can be considered as an adjunct to ACLS. If demonstrated to be effective clinically, REBOA represents a potentially cost-effective and generalizable intervention that may improve quality of life for patients with non-traumatic cardiac arrest.