Admission Physiology vs Blood Pressure: Predicting the Need for Operating Room Thoracotomy after Penetrating Thoracic Trauma

A Cautionary Tale: The Use of Propensity Matching to Evaluate Hemorrhage-Related Trauma Mortality in the American College of Surgeons TQIP Database

BACKGROUND

Propensity-matched methods are increasingly being applied to the American College of Surgeons TQIP database to evaluate hemorrhage control interventions. We used variation in systolic blood pressure (SBP) to demonstrate flaws in this approach.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients were divided into groups based on initial SBP (iSBP) and SBP at 1 hour (2017 to 2019). Groups were defined as follows: iSBP 90 mmHg or less who decompensated to 60 mmHg or less (immediate decompensation [ID]), iSBP 90 mmHg or less who remained greater than 60 mmHg (stable hypotension [SH]), and iSBP greater than 90 mmHg who decompensated to 60 mmHg or less (delayed decompensation [DD]). Individuals with Head or Spine Abbreviated Injury Scale score 3 or greater were excluded. Propensity score was assigned using demographic and clinical variables. Outcomes of interest were in-hospital mortality, emergency department death, and overall length of stay.

RESULTS

Propensity matching yielded 4,640 patients per group in analysis #1 (SH vs DD) and 5,250 patients per group in analysis #2 (SH vs ID). The DD and ID groups had 2-fold higher in-hospital mortality than the SH group (DD 30% vs 15%, p < 0.001; ID 41% vs 18%, p < 0.001). Emergency department death rate was 3 times higher in the DD group and 5 times higher in the ID group (p < 0.001), and length of stay was 4 days shorter in the DD group and 1 day shorter in the ID group (p < 0.001). Odds of death were 2.6 times higher for the DD vs SH group and 3.2 times higher for the ID vs SH group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in mortality rate by SBP variation underscore the difficulty of identifying individuals with a similar degree of hemorrhagic shock using the American College of Surgeons TQIP database despite propensity matching. Large databases lack the detailed data needed to rigorously evaluate hemorrhage control interventions.

Shot through the heart: A 17-year analysis of pre-hospital and hospital deaths from penetrating cardiac injuries

BACKGROUND

Penetrating cardiac injuries (PCI) are often fatal despite rapid transport and treatment in the prehospital setting. Although many studies have identified risk factors for mortality, few studies have included non-transported field mortalities. This study analyzes penetrating cardiac injuries including hospital and coroner reports in the current era.

METHODS

Seventeen years of data were reviewed, including the trauma center (TC) registry, medical records, and coroner reports from 2000-2016. PCI were graded using American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) cardiac organ injury score (COIS). Subjects were divided into three groups: field deaths, hospital deaths, and survivors to hospital discharge. The primary outcome is survival to hospital discharge overall and among those transported to the hospital.

RESULTS

During the study period, 643 PCI patients were identified, with 52 excluded for inadequate data, leaving 591 for analysis. Mean age was 38.1 ± 17.5 years, and survivors (n=66) were significantly younger than field deaths (n=359) (32.6 ± 14.4 vs 41.1 ± 18.5, p<0.001). Stab wounds had higher survival than gunshot wounds (26.6% vs. 4.3%, p<0.001). COIS grades 4 to 6 (n=602) had lower survival than grades 1 to 3 (n=41) (8.3% vs. 39.0%, p<0.001). Survivors (n=66) had lower median COIS than patients who died in hospital (n=218) (4 vs. 5, p<0.001). Single chamber PCI had higher survival than multiple chamber PCI (13% vs. 5%, p=0.004).  The left ventricle is the most injured (n=177), and right ventricle PCI has the highest survival (p<0.001).  Of field deaths, left ventricular injuries had the highest single chamber mortality (60%), equaling multi-chamber PCI (60%).

CONCLUSIONS

Survival to both TC evaluation and hospital discharge following PCI is influenced by many factors including age, mechanism, anatomic site, and grade. Despite advances in trauma care, survival has not appreciably improved.

Association of Early Norepinephrine Administration With 24-Hour Mortality Among Patients With Blunt Trauma and Hemorrhagic Shock

IMPORTANCE

Hemorrhagic shock is a common cause of preventable death after injury. Vasopressor administration for patients with blunt trauma and hemorrhagic shock is often discouraged.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of early norepinephrine administration with 24-hour mortality among patients with blunt trauma and hemorrhagic shock.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study used data from 3 registries in the US and France on all consecutive patients with blunt trauma from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2018. Patients were alive on admission with hemorrhagic shock, defined by prehospital or admission systolic blood pressure less than 100 mm Hg and evidence of hemorrhage (ie, prehospital or resuscitation room transfusion of packed red blood cells, receipt of emergency treatment for hemorrhage control, transfusion of >10 units of packed red blood cells in the first 24 hours, or death from hemorrhage). Blunt trauma was defined as any exposure to nonpenetrating kinetic energy, collision, or deceleration. Statistical analysis was performed from January 15, 2021, to February 22, 2022.

EXPOSURE

Continuous administration of norepinephrine in the prehospital environment or resuscitation room prior to hemorrhage control, according to European guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was 24-hour mortality, and the secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The average treatment effect (ATE) of early norepinephrine administration on 24-hour mortality was estimated according to the Rubin causal model. Inverse propensity score weighting and the doubly robust approach with 5 distinct analytical strategies were used to determine the ATE.

RESULTS

A total of 52 568 patients were screened for inclusion, and 2164 patients (1508 men [70%]; mean [SD] age, 46 [19] years; median Injury Severity Score, 29 [IQR, 17-36]) presented with acute hemorrhage and were included. A total of 1497 patients (69.1%) required emergency hemorrhage control, 128 (5.9%) received a prehospital transfusion of packed red blood cells, and 543 (25.0%) received a massive transfusion. Norepinephrine was administered to 1498 patients (69.2%). The 24-hour mortality rate was 17.8% (385 of 2164), and the in-hospital mortality rate was 35.6% (770 of 2164). None of the 5 analytical strategies suggested any statistically significant association between norepinephrine administration and 24-hour mortality, with ATEs ranging from -4.6 (95% CI, -11.9 to 2.7) to 2.1 (95% CI, -2.1 to 6.3), or between norepinephrine administration and in-hospital mortality, with ATEs ranging from -1.3 (95% CI, -9.5 to 6.9) to 5.3 (95% CI, -2.1 to 12.8).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study suggest that early norepinephrine infusion was not associated with 24-hour or in-hospital mortality among patients with blunt trauma and hemorrhagic shock. Randomized clinical trials that study the effect of early norepinephrine administration among patients with trauma and hypotension are warranted to further assess whether norepinephrine is safe for patients with hemorrhagic shock.

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.