Yost MT, Driban M, Dissak Delon FN, Mbianyor MA, Kinge T, Njock R, Nkusu D, Tsiagadigui JG, Carvalho M, Oke R, Chichom-Mefire A, Juillard C, Christie SA. Crystalloid resuscitation is associated with decreased treatment delays and improved systolic blood pressures in a blood-constrained setting.
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open 2024;
9:e001290. [PMID:
38616791 PMCID:
PMC11015245 DOI:
10.1136/tsaco-2023-001290]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2023] [Accepted: 03/22/2024] [Indexed: 04/16/2024] Open
Abstract
Objectives
We analyzed resuscitation practices in Cameroonian patients with trauma as a first step toward developing a context-appropriate resuscitation protocol. We hypothesized that more patients would receive crystalloid-based (CB) resuscitation with a faster time to administration than blood product (BL) resuscitation.
Methods
We included patients enrolled between 2017 and 2019 in the Cameroon Trauma Registry (CTR). Patients presenting with hemorrhagic shock (systolic blood pressure (SBP) <100 mm Hg and active bleeding) were categorized as receiving CB, BL, or no resuscitation (NR). We evaluated differences between cohorts with the Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. We compared time to treatment with the Wilcoxon rank sum test.
Results
Of 9635 patients, 403 (4%) presented with hemorrhagic shock. Of these, 278 (69%) patients received CB, 39 (10%) received BL, and 86 (21%) received NR. BL patients presented with greater injury severity (Highest Estimated Abbreviated Injury Scale (HEAIS) 4 BL vs 3 CB vs 1 NR, p<0.001), and lower median hemoglobin (8.0 g/dL BL, 11.4 g/dL CB, 10.6 g/dL NR, p<0.001). CB showed greater initial improvement in SBP (12 mm Hg CB vs 9 mm Hg BL vs 0 NR mm Hg, p=0.04) compared with BL or no resuscitation, respectively. Median time to treatment was lower for CB than BL (12 vs 131 min, p<0.01). Multivariate logistic regression adjusted for injury severity found no association between resuscitation type and mortality (CB adjusted OR (aOR) 1.28, p=0.82; BL aOR 1.05, p=0.97).
Conclusions
CB was associated with faster treatment, greater SBP elevation, and similar survival compared with BL in Cameroonian patients with trauma with hemorrhagic shock. In blood-constrained settings, treatment delays associated with blood product transfusion may offset the physiologic benefits of an early BL strategy. CB prior to definitive hemorrhage control in this resource-limited setting may be a necessary strategy to optimize perfusion pressure.
Level of evidence and study type
III, retrospective study.
Collapse