Complications of Combat Blast Injuries and Wounds

Coblation Versus Surgical Debridement Against MRSA Infection in Wounds With Shrapnel: A Preliminary Study

INTRODUCTION

Debridement plays a critical role in wound management. In addition to removing necrotic tissue, debridement can eliminate bacteria frequently harbored within the tissue. This study evaluated a novel debridement method that uses plasma-based radiofrequency technology to remove tissue and bacteria. Coblation is a technology that uses radiofrequency energy to excite the electrolytes in a conductive medium, such as saline, to create a precisely focused plasma. This plasma field contains highly energized particles that possess sufficient energy to break tissue molecular bonds, causing the tissue to dissolve at relatively low temperatures (typically 40 °C to 70 °C).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighteen deep dermal wounds measuring 22 mm × 22 mm × 3 mm deep were created on pigs. Wounds were inoculated with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus USA300 (MRSA USA300) in combination with shrapnel and then covered with a polyurethane dressing for 24 hours. Wounds were then randomly assigned to one of the 3 treatment groups: (1) Coblation, (2) surgical debridement, and (3) no debridement. Wounds were biopsied on days 0, 5, 9, and 12, and specimens were processed for MRSA counts using selective media. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS statistics 27 using one-way ANOVA.

RESULTS

Comparison between coblation and surgical debridement showed a decrease in bacterial count in all assessment times. The lowest bacterial count in all assessment times was observed in wounds debrided with coblation showing a statistically significant (P ≤ .05) decrease in more than 2 Log CFU/g on days 0, 5, and 9 compared to no debridement. On day 12, coblation-debrided wounds exhibited 6.10 ± 0.22 Log CFU/g, and this value represents 99.99% of reduction compared with non-debrided wounds (P ≤ .05). More than 96% of reduction (P ≤ .05) resulted in wounds treated with coblation compared with surgically debrided.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing MRSA bacterial infection counts, especially of biofilm-associated organisms, in combination with shrapnel may have important clinical implications, especially for the military personnel. Further research into the use of this technology in wound management is warranted.

A Quantitative and Qualitative Literature Analysis of the Orthopedic Surgeons' Experience: Reflecting on 20 Years in the Global War on Terror

INTRODUCTION

After over 20 years of war in the Middle East, orthopedic injuries have been among the most prevalent combat-related injuries, accounting for 14% of all surgical procedures at Role 2/3 (R2/R3) facilities according to the DoD Trauma Registry. To further delineate the role of the deployed orthopedic surgeon on the modern battlefield, a retrospective review was performed highlighting both quantitative and qualitative analysis factors associated with orthopedic surgical care during the war in the Middle East.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of orthopedic surgeons in the Middle East from 2001 to 2021. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed and Embase databases using a two-reviewer strategy. Articles were compiled and reviewed using Covidence. Inclusion criteria included journal articles focusing on orthopedic injuries sustained during the Global War on Terror (GWoT) in an adult U.S. Military population. In the event of a conflict, a third author would determine the relevance of the article. For the remaining articles, a full-text review was conducted to extract relevant predetermined quantitative data, and the Delphi consensus method was then utilized to highlight relevant qualitative themes.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 1,226 potentially relevant articles. In all, 40 studies ultimately met the eligibility criteria. With the consultation of previously deployed orthopedic surgeons at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, a retrospective thematic analysis of the 40 studies revealed five themes encompassing the orthopedic surgeons experience throughout GWoT. These themes include unique mechanisms of orthopedic injury compared to previous war injuries due to novel weaponry, differences in interventions depending on R2 versus R3 locations, differences in injuries from those seen in civilian settings, the maintained emphasis on humanitarian aspect of an orthopedic surgeon's mission, and lastly relation of pre-deployment training to perceived deployed success of the orthopedic surgeons. From this extensive review, we found that explosive mechanisms of injury were greatly increased when compared to previous conflicts and were the etiology for the majority of orthopedic injuries sustained. With the increase of complex explosive injuries in the setting of improved body armor and overall survival, R2/3 facilities showed an increased demand for orthopedic intervention including debridement, amputations, and external fixation. Combat injuries sustained during the GWoT differ in the complications, management, and complexity when compared to civilian trauma. "Humanitarian" cases made up a significant number of operative cases for the deployed orthopedic surgeon. Lastly, heterogeneous training opportunities were available prior to deployment (fellowship, combat extremity surgical courses, and dedicated pre-deployment training), and the most commonly identified useful training was learning additional soft-tissue coverage techniques.

CONCLUSION

These major themes indicate an emphasis on pre-deployment training and the strategic positioning of orthopedic surgeons to reflect the changing landscape of musculoskeletal trauma care. Moving forward, these authors recommend analyzing the comfort and perceived capability of orthopedic surgeons in these unique military environments to best prepare for a changing operational format and the possibility of future peer-peer conflicts that will likely lead to a lack of medical evacuation and prolonged field care.

Blast Injury Patterns Among Israel Defense Forces Fatalities

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of blast injuries on the battlefield has risen over the last several decades. In order to improve prevention and treatment, it is essential to understand the severity and bodily distribution of these injuries. This study aims to characterize blast injury patterns among IDF fatalities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a descriptive, retrospective study on postmortem reports of military-blast fatalities between the years 1982 and 2021. Body regions injured according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) were described. The frequency of body region injury combinations was mapped, and the correlation between injured body regions was calculated using Pearson's coefficient. Analysis of a subgroup with a postmortem computed tomography (CT-PM) or autopsy was performed, describing severe (AIS ≥ 3) injury patterns.

RESULTS

Overall, 222 fatalities suffered from blast injury, with most injuries affecting the upper and lower extremities (63.7% and 66.5%, respectively), followed by the head (57.1%) and the thorax (56.6%). The median number of injured body regions was 4 (interquartile range, 2-5). The most frequent injury combinations were the upper and lower extremities (51%), the upper extremities and the thorax (45%), and the lower extremities and the thorax (41%). In all, 47/222 (21.2%) fatalities had a documented autopsy or CT-PM report. Among the fatalities with CT-PM or autopsy, the head (63.8%) and the thorax (57.4%) were most frequently severely injured (AIS ≥ 3).

CONCLUSIONS

Among blast fatalities in the military setting, the extremities were most commonly injured. However, data suggest that the head and thorax are more likely to sustain severe blast injuries resulting in mortality. Blast injuries in this cohort were characterized by concomitant involvement of several regions. Development of protective gear to minimize the multisystem injuries inflicted by blast injuries is warranted and should be focused on distinct types and anatomical distribution of severe blast injuries as reported in this study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Retrospective analysis.