Severely injured patients benefit from in-house attending trauma surgeons

Trauma-related preventable death; data analysis and panel review at a level 1 trauma centre in Amsterdam, the Netherlands

PURPOSE

Trauma-related death is used as a parameter to evaluate the quality of trauma care and identify cases in which mortality could have been prevented under optimal trauma care conditions. The aim of this study was to identify trauma-related preventable death (TRPD) within our institute by an external expert panel and to evaluate inter-panel reliability.

METHODS

Trauma-related deaths between the 1st of January 2020 and the 1st of February 2022 at the Amsterdam University Medical Centre were identified. The severely injured patients (injury severity score ≥ 16) were enrolled for preventability analysis by an external multidisciplinary panel, consisting of a trauma surgeon, anaesthesiologist, emergency physician, neurosurgeon, and forensic physician. Case descriptions were provided, and panellists were asked to classify deaths as non-preventable, potentially preventable, and preventable. Agreements between the five observers were assessed by Fleiss kappa statistics.

RESULTS

In total 95 trauma-related deaths were identified. Of which 36 fatalities were included for analysis, the mean age was 55.3 years (± 24.5), 69.4% were male and 88.9% suffered blunt trauma. The mean injury severity score was 35.3 (± 15.3). Interobserver agreement within the external panel was moderate for survivability (Fleiss kappa 0.474) but low for categorical preventable death classification (Fleiss kappa 0.298). Most of the disagreements were between non-preventable or potentially preventable with care that could have been improved.

CONCLUSION

Multidisciplinary panel review has a moderate inter-observer agreement regarding survivability and low agreement regarding categorical preventable death classification. A valid definition and classification of TRPD is required to improve inter-observer agreement and quality of trauma care.

Outcome of severely injured patients in a unique trauma system with 24/7 double trauma surgeon on-call service

BACKGROUND

The presence of in-house attending trauma surgeons has improved efficiency of processes in the treatment of polytrauma patients. However, literature remains equivocal regarding the influence of the presence of in-house attendings on mortality. In our hospital there is a double trauma surgeon on-call system. In this system an in-house trauma surgeon is 24/7 backed up by a second trauma surgeon to assist with urgent surgery or multiple casualties. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcome in severely injured patients in this unique trauma system.

METHODS

From 2014 to 2021, a prospective population-based cohort consisting of consecutive polytrauma patients aged ≥ 15 years requiring both urgent surgery (≤ 24h) and admission to Intensive Care Unit (ICU) was investigated. Demographics, treatment, outcome parameters and pre- and in-hospital transfer times were analyzed.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirteen patients with a median age of 44 years (71% male), and median Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 33 were included. Mortality rate was 19% (68% due to traumatic brain injury). All patients stayed ≤ 32 min in ED before transport to either CT or OR. Fifty-one percent of patients who needed damage control surgery (DCS) had a more deranged physiology, needed more blood products, were more quickly in OR with shorter time in OR, than patients with early definitive care (EDC). There was no difference in mortality rate between DCS and EDC patients. Fifty-six percent of patients had surgery during off-hours. There was no difference in outcome between patients who had surgery during daytime and during off-hours. Death could possibly have been prevented in 1 exsanguinating patient (1.7%).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of severely injured patients in need of urgent surgery and ICU support it was demonstrated that surgical decision making was swift and accurate with low preventable death rates. 24/7 Physical presence of a dedicated trauma team has likely contributed to these good outcomes.

The effect of an on-site trauma surgeon during resuscitations of severely injured patients

BACKGROUND

Although the timely involvement of trauma surgeons is widely accepted as standard care in a trauma center, there is an ongoing debate regarding the value of an on-site attending trauma surgeon compared to an on-call trauma surgeon. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of introducing an on-site trauma surgeons and the effect of their presence on the adherence to Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) related tasks and resuscitation pace in the trauma bay.

METHODS

The resuscitations of severely injured (ISS > 15) trauma patients 1 month before and 1 month after the introduction of an on-site trauma surgeon were assessed using video analysis. The primary outcome was total resuscitation time. Second, time from trauma bay admission until tasks were performed, and ATLS adherence were assessed.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight videos of resuscitations have been analyzed. After the introduction of an on-site trauma surgeon, the mean total resuscitation time was 259 seconds shorter (p = 0.03) and seven ATLS related tasks (breathing assessment, first and second IV access, EKG monitoring and abdominal, pelvic, and long bone examination; were performed significantly earlier during trauma resuscitation (p ≤ 0.05). Further, we found a significant enhancement to the adherence of six ATLS related tasks (Airway assessment, application of a rigid collar, IV access; EKG monitoring, log roll, and pronouncing results of arterial blood gas analysis; p-value ≤0.05).

CONCLUSION

Having a trauma surgeon on-site during trauma resuscitations of severely injured patients resulted in improved processes in the trauma bay. This demonstrates the need of direct involvement of trauma surgeons in institutions treating severely injured patients.

The association between out of hours burn centre admission and in-hospital outcomes in patients with severe burns

INTRODUCTION

Patients with severe burns (≥20 % total body surface area [TBSA]) have specific and time sensitive needs on arrival to the burn centre. Burn care systems in Australia and New Zealand are organised differently during weekday business hours compared to overnight and weekends. The aims of this study were to compare the profile of adult patients with severe burns admitted during business hours with patients admitted out of hours and to quantify the association between time of admission and in-hospital outcomes in the Australian and New Zealand context.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Burns Registry of Australia and New Zealand for adults (≥18 years) with severe burns admitted to Australian or New Zealand burn centres between July 2016 and June 2020. Differences in patient profiles, clinical management, and in-hospital outcomes were investigated. Univariable and multivariable logistic and linear regression models were used to quantify associations between time of admission and in-hospital outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

We found 623 patients eligible for inclusion. Most patients were admitted out of hours (69.2 %), their median age was 42 years, and most were male (78 %). The median size burn was 30 % TBSA and 32 % of patients had an inhalation injury. A greater proportion of patients admitted out of hours had alcohol and/or drugs involved with injury compared to patients admitted during business hours. No other differences between groups were observed. Patients in both groups had similar odds of dying in hospital (Odds Ratio [OR], 95 % Confidence Interval [95 %CI] 1.49 [0.64, 3.48]), developing acute kidney injury within 72 h (OR, 95 %CI 0.58 [0.32, 1.07]), or sepsis (OR, 95 %CI 1.04 [0.46, 2.35]). No association was found between time of admission and hospital (%, 95 %CI 1.00 [0.82, 1.23]) nor intensive care length of stay (%, 95 %CI 0.97 [0.73, 1.27]).

DISCUSSION

In this first Australian and/or New Zealand study to explore the association between time of admission and burn patient in-hospital outcomes, out of hours admission was not associated with patient outcomes of interest.

CONCLUSION

These findings support current models of care in Australian and New Zealand burn centres, however further investigation is required. Nonetheless, given most severe burns patients arrive out of hours to burn the centre, it is plausible that out of hours availability of senior burn clinicians will improve patient care and safety resilience within burn care systems.

The role of acute care surgeons in treating rib fractures-a retrospective cohort study from a single level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

Rib fractures are the most common thoracic injury in patients who sustained blunt trauma, and potentially life-threatening associated injuries are prevalent. Multi-disciplinary work-up is crucial to achieving a comprehensive understanding of these patients. The present study demonstrated the experience of an acute care surgery (ACS) model for rib fracture management from a single level I trauma center over 13 years.

METHODS

Data from patients diagnosed with acute rib fractures from January 2008 to December 2020 were collected from the trauma registry of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (CGMH). Information, including patient age, sex, injury mechanism, Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) in different anatomic regions, injury severity score (ISS), index admission department, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), total admission LOS, mortality, and other characteristics of multiple rib fracture, were analyzed. Patients who received surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) were analyzed separately, and basic demographics and clinical outcomes were compared between acute care and thoracic surgeons.

RESULTS

A total of 5103 patients diagnosed with acute rib fracture were admitted via the emergency department (ED) of CGMH in the 13-year study period. The Department of Trauma and Emergency Surgery (TR) received the most patients (70.8%), and the Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery (CTS) received only 3.1% of the total patients. SSRF was initiated in 2017, and TR performed fixation for 141 patients, while CTS operated for 16 patients. The basic demographics were similar between the two groups, and no significant differences were noted in the outcomes, including LOS, LCU LOS, length of indwelling chest tube, or complications. There was only one mortality in all SSRF patients, and the patient was from the CTS group.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute care surgeons provided good-quality care to rib fracture patients, whether SSRF or non-SSRF. Acute care surgeons also safely performed SSRF. Therefore, we propose that the ACS model may be an option for rib fracture management, depending on the deployment of staff in each institute.

In-House Attending Trauma Surgeon Does Not Reduce Mortality in Patients Presented to a Level 1 Trauma Center

BACKGROUND

Trauma is the leading cause of death in the Western world. Trauma systems have been paramount in opposing this problem. Commonly, Level 1 Trauma Centers are staffed by in-house (IH) attending trauma surgeons available 24/7, whereas other institutions function on an on-call (OC) basis with defined response times. There is on-going debate about the value of an IH attending trauma surgeon compared to OC trauma surgeons regarding clinical outcome.

METHODS

This study was performed at a tertiary care facility complying with all requirements to be a designated Level 1 Trauma Center as defined by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT). Inclusion occurred from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013. Patients were assigned an identifier for IH trauma surgeon attendance versus OC attendance. The primary outcome variable studied was overall mortality in relation to IH or OC attending trauma surgeons. Additionally, time to operating theater, hospital length-of-stay (HLOS), and intensive care unit (ICU) admittance were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 1,287 unique trauma cases in 1,285 patients were presented to the trauma team. Of all cases, 712 (55.3%) occurred between 1700h and 0800h. These 712 cases were treated by an IH attending in 66.3% (n = 472) and an OC attending in 33.7% (n = 240). In the group of patients treated by an IH attending trauma surgeon, the overall mortality rate was 5.5% (n = 26); in the group treated by an OC attending, the overall mortality rate was 4.6% (n = 11; P = .599). Cause of death was traumatic brain injury (TBI) in 57.6%. No significant difference was found in the time between initial presentation at the trauma room and arrival in the operating theater.

CONCLUSION

In terms of trauma-related mortality during non-office hours, no benefit was demonstrated through IH trauma surgeons compared to OC trauma surgeons.

Mortality in polytrauma patients with moderate to severe TBI on par with isolated TBI patients: TBI as last frontier in polytrauma patients

BACKGROUND

Mortality caused by Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) remains high, despite improvements in trauma and critical care. Polytrauma is naturally associated with high mortality. This study compared mortality rates between isolated TBI (_ITBI) patients and polytrauma patients with TBI (_PTBI) admitted to ICU to investigate if concomitant injuries lead to higher mortality amongst TBI patients.

METHODS

A 3-year cohort study compared polytrauma patients with TBI (_PTBI) with AIS head ≥3 (and AIS of other body regions ≥3) from a prospective collected database to isolated TBI (_ITBI) patients from a retrospective collected database with AIS head ≥3 (AIS of other body regions ≤2), both admitted to a single level-I trauma center ICU. Patients <16 years of age, injury caused by asphyxiation, drowning, burns and ICU transfers from and to other hospitals were excluded. Patient demographics, shock and resuscitation parameters, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and mortality data were collected and analyzed for group differences.

RESULTS

259 patients were included; 111 _PTBI and 148 _ITBI patients. The median age was 54 [33-67] years, 177 (68%) patients were male, median ISS was 26 [20-33]. Seventy-nine (31%) patients died. Patients with _PTBI developed more ARDS (7% vs. 1%, p = 0.041) but had similar MODS rates (18% vs. 10%, p = 0.066). They also stayed longer on the ventilator (7 vs. 3 days, p=<0.001), longer in ICU (9 vs. 4 days, p=<0.001) and longer in hospital (24 vs. 11 days, p=<0.001). TBI was the most prevalent cause of death in polytrauma patients. Patients with _PTBI showed no higher in-hospital mortality rate. Moreover, mortality rates were skewed towards _ITBI patients (24% vs. 35%, p = 0.06).

DISCUSSION

There was no difference in mortality rates between _PTBI and _ITBI patients, suggesting TBI-severity as the predominant factor for ICU mortality in an era of ever improving acute trauma care.

The pace of a trauma resuscitation: experience matters

Purpose

Resuscitation quality and pace depend on effective team coordination, which can be facilitated by adequate leadership. Our primary aim was to assess the influence of trauma team leader experience on resuscitation pace. Second, we investigated the influence of injury severity on resuscitation pace.

Methods

The trauma team leaders were identified (Staff trauma surgeon vs Fellow trauma surgeon) and classified from video analysis during a 1-week period. Resuscitations were assessed for time to the treatment plan, total resuscitation time, and procedure time. Furthermore, patient and resuscitation characteristics were assessed and compared: age, gender, Injury Severity Score, Glasgow Coma Scale < 9, and the number (and duration) of surgical procedures during initial resuscitation. Correlations between total resuscitation time, Injury Severity Score, and time to treatment plan were calculated.

Results

After adjustment for the time needed for procedures, the time to treatment plan and total resuscitation time was significantly shorter in resuscitations led by a Staff trauma surgeon compared to a Fellow trauma surgeon (median 648 s (IQR 472–813) vs 852 s (IQR 694–1256); p 0.01 resp. median 1280 s (IQR 979–1494) vs 1535 s (IQR 1247–1864), p 0.04). Surgical procedures were only performed during resuscitations led by Staff trauma surgeons (4 thorax drains, 1 endotracheal intubation, 1 closed fracture reduction). Moreover, a significant negative correlation (r:  – 0.698, p < 0.01) between Injury Severity Score and resuscitation time was found.

Conclusion

Experienced trauma team leaders may positively influence the pace of the resuscitation. Moreover, we found that the resuscitation pace increases when the patient is more severely injured.

In-house versus on-call trauma surgeon coverage: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A rapid trauma response is essential to provide optimal care for severely injured patients. However, it is currently unclear if the presence of an in-house trauma surgeon affects this response during call and influences outcomes. This study compares in-hospital mortality and process-related outcomes of trauma patients treated by a 24/7 in-house versus an on-call trauma surgeon.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched on the first of November 2020. All studies comparing patients treated by a 24/7 in-house versus an on-call trauma surgeon were considered eligible for inclusion. A meta-analysis of mortality rates including all severely injured patients (i.e., Injury Severity Score of ≥16) was performed. Random-effect models were used to pool mortality rates, reported as risk ratios. The main outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Process-related outcomes were chosen as secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

In total, 16 observational studies, combining 64,337 trauma patients, were included. The meta-analysis included 8 studies, comprising 7,490 severely injured patients. A significant reduction in mortality rate was found in patients treated in the 24/7 in-house trauma surgeon group compared with patients treated in the on-call trauma surgeon group (risk ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.95; p = 0.002; I2 = 0%). In 10 of 16 studies, at least 1 process-related outcome improved after the in-house trauma surgeon policy was implemented.

CONCLUSION

A 24/7 in-house trauma surgeon policy is associated with reduced mortality rates for severely injured patients treated at level I trauma centers. In addition, presence of an in-house trauma surgeon during call may improve process-related outcomes. This review recommends implementation of a 24/7 in-house attending trauma surgeon at level I trauma centers. However, the final decision on attendance policy might depend on center and region-specific conditions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review/meta-analysis, level III.

Process related decisions and in-hospital transport times in polytrauma patients benefit from 24/7 in-house presence of trauma surgeons

BACKGROUND

Time and cause of death in polytrauma has shifted due to improvements in trauma and critical care. These include logistical improvements with dedicated trauma teams and in-house trauma surgeons. This study investigated in-hospital transport times and influence of process related decisions on mortality in polytrauma patients.

STUDY DESIGN

A 6.5-year prospective study included consecutive polytrauma patients ≥15 years admitted to a Level-1 Trauma Center ICU with 24/7 in-house trauma surgeons. Demographics, physiologic parameters, pre- and in-hospital transport times were prospectively collected. Data are presented as median(IQR).

RESULTS

391 patients were included with median ISS of 29(22-36). 82 patients(21%) had a SBP≤90 mmHg on arrival in ED. 44 patients went from ED directly to OR for urgent surgery, all others had CT prior to OR and/or ICU. Patients who went directly to OR from ED had median transport time of 28(23-37) min. Patients who had CT after ED had median transport time of 31(25-42) min. 74(19%) patients died, majority caused by TBI(70%). Ten patients died <24 h after trauma (4 hemorrhage,3 TBI,2 ischemia,1 cardiac injury), 9 of them went straight to OR from ED. Death could possibly have been prevented in 1 patient (1%) who later died of hemorrhage but went to CT before urgent surgery.

CONCLUSION

In-hospital transport times from ED were half an hour regardless of the following destination (OR/CT). Decisions for transport order based on clinical signs in primary survey were rapid and accurate. This could be attributed to dedicated trauma teams and 24/7 physical presence of trauma surgeons.

Application of trauma time axis management in the treatment of severe trauma patients

PURPOSE

This study aimed at exploring the application of trauma time axis management in the treatment of severe trauma patients by using the Medicalsystem trauma system.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study involving patients with severe trauma. Patients who were admitted before the application of the Medicalsystem trauma system were divided into before system group; patients who were admitted after the application of the system were divided into after system group. Comparison was made between the two groups. For normally distributed data, means were reported along with standard deviation, and comparisons were made using the independent samples t test. Categorical data were compared using the Chi-square test. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare nonparametric variables.

RESULTS

There were 528 patients admitted to the study during the study period. There was no significant statistical difference in the time from the start of trauma team to arrive at the resuscitation room between the two groups. The time from arrival at hospital to endotracheal intubation, to ventilator therapy, to blood transfusion, to completion of CT scan, to completion of closed thoracic drainage, to the start of operation, as well as the length of stay in resuscitation room and hospital were significantly lower after the application of the Medicalsystem trauma system. The mortality was decreased by 8.6% in the after system group compared with that in the before system group, but there was no statistical difference.

CONCLUSION

The Medicalsystem trauma system can optimize diagnosis and treatment process for trauma patients, and accordingly improve the treatment efficiency and shorten the treatment time. Therefore, the Medicalsystem trauma system deserves further popularization and promotion.

Epidemiology of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury in the Netherlands: Emergency Medical Service, Hospital, and Functional Outcomes

Background

Evaluating treatment of traumatic spinal cord injuries (TSCIs) from the prehospital phase until postrehabilitation is crucial to improve outcomes of future TSCI patients.

Objective

To describe the flow of patients with TSCI through the prehospital, hospital, and rehabilitation settings and to relate treatment outcomes to emergency medical services (EMS) transport locations and surgery timing.

Method

Consecutive TSCI admissions to a level I trauma center (L1TC) in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively identified. Corresponding EMS, hospital, and rehabilitation records were assessed.

Results

A total of 151 patients were included. Their median age was 58 (IQR 37-72) years, with the majority being male (68%) and suffering from cervical spine injuries (75%). In total, 66.2% of the patients with TSCI symptoms were transported directly to an L1TC, and 30.5% were secondarily transferred in from a lower level trauma center. Most injuries were due to falls (63.0%) and traffic accidents (31.1%), mainly bicycle-related. Most patients showed stable vital signs in the ambulance and the emergency department. After hospital discharge, 71 (47.0%) patients were admitted to a rehabilitation hospital, and 34 (22.5%) patients went home. The 30-day mortality rate was 13%. Patients receiving acute surgery (<12 hours) compared to subacute surgery (>12h, <2 weeks) showed no significance in functional independence scores after rehabilitation treatment.

Conclusion

A surge in age and bicycle-injuries in TSCI patients was observed. A substantial number of patients with TSCI were undertriaged. Acute surgery (<12 hours) showed comparable outcomes results in subacute surgery (>12h, <2 weeks) patients.

Time is of the essence when treating necrotizing soft tissue infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although the phrase “time is fascia” is well acknowledged in the case of necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs), solid evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to review the current literature concerning the timing of surgery in relation to mortality and amputation in patients with NSTIs.

Methods

A systematic search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) was performed. The primary outcomes were mortality and amputation. These outcomes were related to the following time-related variables: (1) time from onset symptoms to presentation; (2) time from onset symptoms to surgery; (3) time from presentation to surgery; (4) duration of the initial surgical procedure. For the meta-analysis, the effects were estimated using random-effects meta-analysis models.

Result

A total of 109 studies, with combined 6051 NSTI patients, were included. Of these 6051 NSTI patients, 1277 patients died (21.1%). A total of 33 studies, with combined 2123 NSTI patients, were included for quantitative analysis. Mortality was significantly lower for patients with surgery within 6 h after presentation compared to when treatment was delayed more than 6 h (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.26–0.70; 10 studies included). Surgical treatment within 6 h resulted in a 19% mortality rate compared to 32% when surgical treatment was delayed over 6 h. Also, surgery within 12 h reduced the mortality compared to surgery after 12 h from presentation (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.27–0.61; 16 studies included). Patient delay (time from onset of symptoms to presentation or surgery) did not significantly affect the mortality in this study. None of the time-related variables assessed significantly reduced the amputation rate. Three studies reported on the duration of the first surgery. They reported a mean operating time of 78, 81, and 102 min with associated mortality rates of 4, 11.4, and 60%, respectively.

Conclusion

Average mortality rates reported remained constant (around 20%) over the past 20 years. Early surgical debridement lowers the mortality rate for NSTI with almost 50%. Thus, a sense of urgency is essential in the treatment of NSTI.

The evolution of trauma care in the Netherlands over 20 years

Introduction

In 1999 an inclusive trauma system was initiated in the Netherlands and a nationwide trauma registry, including all admitted trauma patients to every hospital, was started. The Dutch trauma system is run by trauma surgeons who treat both the truncal (visceral) and extremity injuries (fractures).

Materials and Methods

In this comprehensive review based on previous published studies, data over the past 20 years from the central region of the Netherlands (Utrecht) was evaluated.

Results

It is demonstrated that the initiation of the trauma systems and the governance by the trauma surgeons led to a region-wide mortality reduction of 50% and a mortality reduction for the most severely injured of 75% in the level 1 trauma centre. Furthermore, major improvements were found in terms of efficiency, demonstrating the quality of the current system and its constructs such as the type of surgeon. Due to the major reduction in mortality over the past few years, the emphasis of trauma care evaluation shifts towards functional outcome of severely injured patients. For the upcoming years, centralisation of severely injured patients should also aim at the balance between skills in primary resuscitation and surgical stabilization versus longitudinal surgical involvement.

Conclusion

Further centralisation to a limited number of level 1 trauma centres in the Netherlands is necessary to consolidate experience and knowledge for the trauma surgeon. The future trauma surgeon, as specialist for injured patients, should be able to provide the vast majority of trauma care in this system. For the remaining part, intramural, regional and national collaboration is essential

Study methodology in trauma care: towards question-based study designs

The randomized controlled trial (RCT) in surgery may not always be ethical, feasible, or necessary to address a particular research question about the effect of a surgical intervention. If so, properly designed and conducted observational (non-randomized) studies may be valuable alternatives for an RCT and produce credible results. In this paper, we discus differences between RCTs and observational studies and differentiate between three types of comparisons of surgical interventions. We assert that results of different designs should be regarded as complementary to each other when evaluating surgical interventions. Criteria for credible observational research are presented to provide guidance for future observational research of surgical interventions. We argue that the research question that is being asked should guide the discussion about the value of a particular study design.

Survey on structural preparedness for treatment of thoracic and abdominal trauma in German-speaking level 1 trauma centers

INTRODUCTION

Increasing sub-specialization has reduced the number of general surgeons involved in the care of trauma patients in German-speaking countries (Germany, Austria and Switzerland) over the past decades. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess, to what extent level 1 trauma centers are still prepared to provide immediate emergency surgery in patients with thoracic or abdominal trauma.

METHODS

Web-based and paper questionnaires were sent to all level 1 trauma centers participating in the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU) in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland from Feb 2017 to Sep 2017. The centers were asked about the presence or availability of surgeons who were able to perform an emergency laparotomy or thoracotomy.

RESULTS

Of all 117 level 1 trauma centers participating in the TR-DGU in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, 97 (83%) gave a response. A board-certified surgeon who is able to perform an emergency laparotomy is present 24 h/7 days a week in 72% of the centers (emergency thoracotomy: 57%). In centers where no such surgeon was present the whole time, the mean maximum time of arrival of the surgeon on call was 18.9 min (SD 7.0, range 10-40 min) regarding the ability to perform an emergency laparotomy and 19.9 min (SD 7.0, range 10-40 min) regarding the emergency thoracotomy.

CONCLUSION

The majority of level 1 trauma centers in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria in the TR-DGU seem to be well prepared to treat severe injuries of the abdominal and thoracic cavities. In some centers, however, a surgeon able to perform an emergency laparotomy or thoracotomy is not available within 30 min.

Outcome of trauma-related emergency laparotomies, in an era of far-reaching specialization

Background

Far reaching sub-specialization tends to become obligatory for surgeons in most Western countries. It is suggested that exposure of surgeons to emergency laparotomy after trauma is ever declining. Therefore, it can be questioned whether a generalist (i.e., general surgery) with additional differentiation such as the trauma surgeon, will still be needed and can remain sufficiently qualified. This study aimed to evaluate volume trends and outcomes of emergency laparotomies in trauma.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed in the University Medical Center Utrecht between January 2008 and January 2018, in which all patients who underwent an emergency laparotomy for trauma were included. Collected data were demographics, trauma-related characteristics, and number of (planned and unplanned) laparotomies with their indications. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes were complications, length of ICU, and overall hospital stay.

Results

A total of 268 index emergency laparotomies were evaluated. Total number of patients who presented with an abdominal AIS > 2 remained constant over the past 10 years, as did the percentage of patients that required an emergency laparotomy. Most were polytrauma patients with a mean ISS = 27.5 (SD ± 14.9). The most frequent indication for laparotomy was hemodynamic instability or ongoing blood loss (44%).Unplanned relaparotomies occurred in 21% of the patients, mostly due to relapse of bleeding. Other complications were anastomotic leakage (8.6%), intestinal leakage after bowel contusion (4%). In addition, an incisional hernia was found in 6.3%. Mortality rate was 16.7%, mostly due to neurologic origin (42%). Average length of stay was 16 days with an ICU stay of 5 days.

Conclusion

This study shows a persistent number of patients requiring emergency laparotomy after (blunt) abdominal trauma over 10 years in a European trauma center. When performed by a dedicated trauma team, this results in acceptable mortality and complication rates in this severely injured population.