Management of traumatic popliteal vein injuries

American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-World Society of Emergency Surgery guidelines on diagnosis and management of peripheral vascular injuries

The peripheral arteries and veins of the extremities are among the most commonly injured vessels in both civilian and military vascular trauma. Blunt causes are more frequent than penetrating except during military conflicts and in certain geographic areas. Physical examination and simple bedside investigations of pulse pressures are key in early identification of these injuries. In stable patients with equivocal physical examinations, computed tomography angiograms have become the mainstay of screening and diagnosis. Immediate open surgical repair remains the first-line therapy in most patients. However, advances in endovascular therapies and more widespread availability of this technology have resulted in an increase in the range of injuries and frequency of utilization of minimally invasive treatments for vascular injuries in stable patients. Prevention of and early detection and treatment of compartment syndrome remain essential in the recovery of patients with significant peripheral vascular injuries. The decision to perform amputation in patients with mangled extremities remains difficult with few clear indicators. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma in conjunction with the World Society of Emergency Surgery seeks to summarize the literature to date and provide guidelines on the presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of peripheral vascular injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review study, level IV.

Impact of ligation versus repair of isolated popliteal vein injuries on in-hospital outcomes in trauma patients

BACKGROUND

Popliteal vascular injuries are common and frequently associated with limb loss. Although many studies have evaluated the treatment and outcomes of popliteal artery injuries (PAI), there is little available evidence regarding popliteal venous injuries (PVI). As such, substantial debate remains regarding the benefit of repair over ligation of PVI. The objectives of this study were to compare in-hospital outcomes of repair versus ligation of isolated PVI, as well as to determine nonvascular factors associated with worse outcomes.

METHODS

Patients in the National Trauma Databank from 2007 to 2014 with at least one PVI were evaluated. First, patients with concomitant PVI and PAI were compared with patients with isolated PVI. Second, outcomes were compared between ligation and repair of isolated PVI. To limit the impact of concomitant injuries and focus on the impact of venous injury management, we defined isolated PVI as cases without concomitant PAI and with Abbreviated Injury Scale severity score of less than 3 for all body regions other than lower extremity. Patients dead on arrival and those with less than 18 years of age were excluded. The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, amputation, and in-hospital amputation-free survival (AFS). Secondary outcomes included lower extremity compartment syndrome, fasciotomy, acute kidney injury, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, and inferior vena cava filter placement.

RESULTS

Overall, 1819 patients (0.03%) had a PVI and after exclusion 1213 met the criteria for initial analysis. Of those, 308 had isolated PVI, and 905 had combined PVI and PAI. Patients with combined PVI and PAI had higher rates of amputation (15.2% vs 6.8%; P < .001), fasciotomy (64.5% vs 30.8%; P < .001), compartment syndrome (14.8% vs 8.8%; P = .006), and a lower AFS (82.9% vs 91.8%; P < .001) than patients with isolated PVI. There was no difference in in-hospital mortality, amputation, or in-hospital AFS between ligation and repair of isolated PVI. On multivariable logistic regression of isolated PVI, ligation was not independently associated with in-hospital AFS, amputation, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Ligation of isolated PVI was not an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality, lower extremity amputation, or in-hospital AFS. Ligation also did not result in higher rates of fasciotomy, acute kidney injury, or pulmonary embolism.

Evaluation, Surgical Management and Outcome of Traumatic Extremity Vascular Injuries: A 5-year Level-1 Trauma Centres Experience

Objective: We aim to share our experience regarding the surgical management and outcome of extremity vascular trauma in level-1 trauma centres in Pakistan.

Patients and methods: All consecutive patients with traumatic extremity vascular injury (TEVI) fulfilling the inclusion criteria; between June 2012 and June 2017 were included. The demographics, clinical presentation, management, and outcome measures were recorded.

Results: The study included 81 patients. The mean age±standard deviation was 28.6±14.5 years and 81.5% (n=66) of the patients were males. Blunt TEVI was found in 65.4% (n=53) of the cases. Partial laceration was the most common type of arterial injury (64.2%, n=52) and autologous interposition venous grafting was the most common repair performed (60.5%, n=49). Fasciotomy was performed in 67.9% (n=55) of the patients. The limb salvage rate was 82.7%. The amputation rate was higher in the blunt trauma group when compared with that of the penetrating trauma group. The length of the intensive care unit stay and the use of polytetrafluoroethylene as interposition graft were two independent predictors of limb loss. The mortality rate in this series was 8.6%.

Conclusion: Blunt TEVI is associated with higher morbidity and limb loss. The use of synthetic graft should be discouraged. The liberal use of autologous interposition venous graft and the judicious use of fasciotomies are helpful to achieve favorable outcomes.

Popliteal vein repair may not impact amputation rates in combined popliteal artery and vein injury

Introduction

This study aimed to determine the incidence, management, and outcomes of popliteal artery injury, popliteal vein injury, and concomitant popliteal artery injury and vein injury.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was completed using the 2000–2010 Nationwide Inpatient Sample utilizing International Classification of Diseases-9 codes to select patients with isolated popliteal artery injury (904.41), isolated popliteal vein injury (904.42), and isolated concomitant popliteal artery and vein injury (958.92). Variables included demographics, procedure type, and outcome during hospital course. Statistical analysis was with chi-square, Fisher exact test, and multivariate analysis.

Results

A total of 2216 patients presented with injury to the popliteal system; 71% (1568) presented with isolated popliteal artery injury, 14% (306) with isolated popliteal vein injury, and 15% (342) with concomitant popliteal artery and vein injury. Amputation was significantly increased in popliteal artery injury and concomitant popliteal artery and vein injury ( P < 0.001) as compared to popliteal vein injury. Ligation of the vein was more common in concomitant popliteal artery and vein injury when compared to popliteal vein injury ( P < 0.05). The rate of amputation was 9.8% for popliteal artery injury, significantly greater than for popliteal vein injury (0.7%, P < 0.001) but not different than for concomitant popliteal artery and vein injury (8.2%, P = NS).

Conclusion

Evidence-based management of popliteal vasculature may increase rates of limb salvage. Within the limitations of the data set used, conclusions appear to be that patients with popliteal vein injury or concomitant popliteal artery and vein injury may be managed with vein ligation without increased amputation rates as compared to popliteal artery injury.

Compartment Syndrome following Open Femoral Fracture with an Isolated Femoral Vein Injury Treated with Acute Repair

Acute compartment syndrome is a surgical emergency and its diagnosis is more difficult in obtunded or insensate patients. We present the case of a 34-year-old woman who sustained a Gustilo-Anderson grade III open midshaft femur fracture with an isolated femoral vein injury treated with direct repair. She developed lower leg compartment syndrome at 48 hours postoperatively, necessitating fasciotomies. She was subsequently found to have a DVT in her femoral vein at the level of the repair and was started on therapeutic anticoagulation. This case highlights the importance of recognition of isolated venous injuries in a trauma setting as a risk factor for developing compartment syndrome.