Endovascular management of traumatic peripheral arterial injuries

Editor's Choice - In Hospital and Long Term Outcomes After Repair of Subclavian and Axillary Artery Injuries

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the in hospital and long term outcomes after open or endovascular repair of subclavian and axillary artery injuries.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single centre study. Data were reviewed from patients with subclavian and or axillary injuries who presented to the authors' centre between January 2009 and December 2022. Outcome data included complications, death, amputations, and re-interventions. A p value < .050 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 62 patients with subclavian or axillary trauma were admitted to the study hospital. Patients were young (median age 32.5 years, range 12 - 53) and most were men (85%); 32 patients experienced blunt trauma, and 30 penetrating trauma. The median injury severity score was 18 (interquartile range [IQR] 9, 34), and 47% of patients had a brachial plexus injury. The arterial injury was occlusion in 62% of patients, and the median ischaemia time was 12.5 hours (IQR 7.13, 24). All patients with subclavian injuries (n = 37) and 13 of 25 patients with an axillary injury underwent endovascular repair (stent graft placement). Open repair was performed in 12 patients with axillary injury (axillobrachial bypass in seven patients). At hospital discharge, the amputation free survival rate was 82% vs. 92% (p = .67), the mortality rate was 10% vs. 8% (p = 1.0), and the amputation rate was 10% vs. 0 (p = .57) for endovascular and open repair, respectively. The mean follow up time was 4.1 ± 3.5 years. After the seven year follow up, the stent primary patency was 42%. No re-interventions or amputations were performed after hospital discharge. Disability was related to fractures and soft tissue and brachial plexus injuries.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular treatment was preferred for patients with subclavian artery injuries. Open repair was preferred for patients with penetrating axillary injuries. In hospital and long term complications were related to fractures and soft tissue and brachial plexus injuries, rather than the treatment of arterial injuries. Measures are needed to reduce ischaemia time and improve brachial plexus injury repair.

Resuscitation and Preparation of the Emergency General Surgery Patient

Traditionally, the workflow surrounding a general surgery patient allows for a period of evaluation and optimization of underlying medical issues to allow for risk modification; however, in the emergency, this optimization period is largely condensed because of its time-dependent nature. Because the lack of optimization can lead to complications, the ability to rapidly resuscitate the patient, proceed to procedural intervention to control the situation, and manage common medical comorbidities is paramount. This article provides an overview on these subjects.

Transarterial interventions in civilian gunshot wound injury: experience from a level-1 trauma center

PURPOSE

To assess the effectiveness of trans-arterial vascular interventions in treatment of civilian gunshot wounds (GSW).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was performed at a level-1 trauma center to include 46 consecutive adults admitted due to GSW related hemorrhage and treated with endovascular interventions from July 2018 to July 2022. Patient demographics and procedural metrics were retrieved. Primary outcomes of interest include technical success and in-hospital mortality. Factors of mortality were assessed using a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients were brought to the endovascular suite directly (endovascular group) from the trauma bay and 25 patients after treatment in the operating room (OR group). The OR group had higher hemodynamic instability (48.0% vs 19.0%, p = 0.040), lower hemoglobin (12.9 vs 10.1, p = 0.001) and platelet counts (235.2 vs 155.1, p = 0.003), and worse Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) score (4.1 vs 10.2, p < 0.0001) at the time of initial presentation. Technical success was achieved in all 40 cases in which targeted embolization was attempted (100%). Empiric embolization was performed in 6/46 (13.0%) patients based on computed tomographic angiogram (CTA) and operative findings. Stent-grafts were placed in 3 patients for subclavian artery injuries. Availability of pre-intervention CTA was associated with shorter fluoroscopy time (19.8 ± 12.1 vs 30.7 ± 18.6 min, p = 0.030). A total of 41 patients were discharged in stable condition (89.1%). Hollow organ injury was associated with mortality (p = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

Endovascular embolization and stenting were effective in managing hemorrhage due to GSW in a carefully selected population. Hollow organ injury was a statistically significant predictor of mortality. Pre-intervention CTA enabled targeted, shorter and equally effective procedures.

[Interventional management of peripheral vascular injuries : From the exclusion indication to the procedure of first choice]

BACKGROUND

Approximately one third of all traumatic peripheral artery injuries affect the upper extremities, while two thirds involve the arteries of the lower extremities. Historically, these injuries were treated by open surgical repair. Nowadays, interventional treatment, such as embolization or stent grafting are increasingly used to treat peripheral artery injuries.

OBJECTIVE

Determination of the current state of interventional treatment options for injuries of peripheral arteries.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Selective literature review on the current state of interventional management of peripheral artery injuries.

RESULTS

Although scarce, the available data confirm the efficacy of interventional techniques for managing peripheral artery injuries; however, despite improvements in treatment techniques and interventional devices, not all patients are equally well suited for endovascular or open surgical treatment. Consequently, a multidisciplinary decision on the best treatment has to be made on a case by case basis.

CONCLUSION

According to the promising clinical data, interventional treatment should be considered more often. Diagnostic algorithms need to be adapted accordingly.

Life and Limb: Current Concepts in Endovascular Treatment of Extremity Trauma

Traumatic injury is the leading cause of death worldwide in younger patient populations and extremity trauma with associated vascular injury accounts for many trauma-related deaths. Iatrogenic injury is also a common cause of extremity vascular trauma and the incidence of iatrogenic injury will likely increase as endovascular techniques continue to become more ubiquitous. For many vascular injuries involving the extremities, surgical repair is viewed as the standard of care. Historically, endovascular techniques did not play a role in the treatment of these vascular injuries, rather they were utilized only as part of the diagnostic assessment; however, there is an increasing trend toward endovascular management of extremity vascular trauma. No validated, widely implemented algorithm to select patients for endovascular intervention exists. Transcatheter techniques, however, play an important role in the management of these patients. For arterial injuries, embolization can be used to rapidly achieve hemostasis if the vessel can be sacrificed. More advanced endovascular techniques such as stent-graft placement may be best employed in the context of isolated, proximal extremity injuries, although there is increasing literature supporting the use of advanced techniques for more distal arterial injuries. The management of peripheral venous trauma remains controversial; however, there is growing data describing successful endovascular management of some peripheral venous injuries. The purpose of this article is to review extremity vascular trauma, concepts of injury triage, endovascular techniques, and intraprocedural considerations.

Open vs Endovascular Treatment of Traumatic Peripheral Arterial Injury: Propensity Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Arterial injuries occur in the setting of blunt and penetrating trauma. Despite increasing use, there remains a paucity of data comparing long-term outcomes of endovascular vs open repair management of these injuries. The aim of our study was to compare outcomes and readmission rates of open vs endovascular repair of traumatic arterial injuries.

STUDY DESIGN

The National Readmission Database (2011-2014) was queried for all adult (age ≥ 18 y) patients presenting with peripheral arterial (axillary, brachial, femoral, and popliteal) injuries. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on intervention: open vs endovascular approach. Propensity score matching (1:2 ratio) was performed. Outcomes measures were complications, length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, and cost of readmission.

RESULTS

A matched cohort of 786 patients was obtained (endovascular: 262, open: 524). Mean age was 45 ± 17 years, and 79% were males. Median LOS was 4 (range 2-6) days for the endovascular group vs 3 (range 2-5) days for the open group (p < 0.01). The endovascular group had higher rates of seroma (4% vs 2%; p = 0.04) and arterial thrombosis (13% vs 7%; p < 0.01) during index hospitalization. Patients who underwent endovascular repair had higher 30-day readmission (11% vs 7%; p = 0.03) and a higher 30-day open-reoperation rate (6% vs 2%; p < 0.01). On subanalysis of the patients who were readmitted, the median cost of each readmission was higher in the endovascular group $47,000 ($27,202-$56,763) compared with $21,000 ($11,889-$43,503) in the open group.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair for peripheral arterial injuries was associated with higher rates of in-hospital complications, readmissions, and costs. As this new technology continues to undergo refinement, a thorough re-evaluation of its indications, risks, and benefits is warranted.

Penetrating Extremity Trauma Endovascular versus Open Repair?

Penetrating extremity trauma (PET) accounts for an estimated 5-15% of trauma with vascular injury and these injuries are accountable for a significant percentage of trauma-related deaths. Historically, vascular injuries were best treated by open repair. While a defined selection criteria and a comprehensive algorithm have not been validated, the advancement of endovascular techniques, embolotherapy, and stent grafting have become viable options for the treatment of penetrating arterial extremity trauma in select patients. Advantages endovascular repair offers include decreasing mortality and morbidity associated with open repair, decreasing blood loss, decreasing iatrogenic injury such as nerve injury, and lower rate of wound infection. Patients stability, type of vascular injury, and lesion location are main factors help deciding between endovascular and open repair. Patient selection between endovascular and open repair should be determined by on a case-by-case situation, individual hospital guidelines, a multidisciplinary approach, and technical expertise.

Proximal penetrating extremity injuries-An opportunity to decrease overtriage?

BACKGROUND

Penetrating injuries to the extremity proximal to the elbow or knee are anatomic criteria for full trauma team activation (FFTA) by the American College of Surgeon's Committee on Trauma standards. This criterion lacks objective evidence-based support. Overtriage of trauma team activation may result in excessive costs and resource burden at trauma centers. We hypothesized that FFTA for penetrating injuries to the proximal extremities by anatomic criteria alone may lead to significant overtriage.

METHODS

A 3-year retrospective review (2013-2015) was completed of all patients evaluated at an urban Level I trauma center with isolated penetrating extremity injuries. Data included the number of full and limited trauma team activations as well as criterion met, Injury Severity Score (ISS), injury, limb characteristics, and disposition. Overtriage was defined as FFTA for an ISS of 15 or less, with a goal rate less than 50%.

RESULTS

We identified 6,335 total trauma team activations with 795 isolated penetrating extremity injuries. Of these injuries, 413 (51.9%) were injuries proximal to the joint. Within this subgroup, 71.2% of patients were discharged from the emergency department with a median ISS of 1 and no additional intervention. Only 5.3% of patients that did not meet additional FFTA criteria underwent immediate operative intervention. By comparison, 21% of FFTAs and 5.8% of limited trauma team activations underwent immediate operative intervention during the 3-year period. Of the 413 isolated penetrating proximal-extremity injuries, only one had an ISS of 15 or greater, resulting in a 99.7% overtriage rate.

CONCLUSION

Penetrating injuries to the extremities are common in urban trauma centers. Full trauma team activation based on anatomic, rather than physiologic, criteria may lead to a significant overtriage rate. Further distinction in the level of trauma team activation may be made based on hard signs of neurovascular injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiological study, level III; Care Management, level IV.

Clinical implications of fracture-associated vascular damage in extremity and pelvic trauma

BACKGROUND

Vascular damage in polytrauma patients is associated with high mortality and morbidity. Therefore, specific clinical implications of vascular damage with fractures in major trauma patients are reassessed.

METHODS

This comprehensive nine-year retrospective single center cohort study analyzed demography, laboratory, treatment and outcome data from 3689 patients, 64 patients with fracture-associated vascular injuries were identified and were compared to a control group.

RESULTS

Vascular damage occurred in 7% of patients with upper and lower limb and pelvic fractures admitted to the trauma room. Overall survival was 80% in pelvic fracture and 97% in extremity fracture patients and comparable to non-vascular trauma patients. Additional arterial damage required substantial fluid administration and was visible as significantly anemia and disturbed coagulation tests upon admission. Open procedures were done in over 80% of peripheral extremity vascular damage. Endovascular procedures were predominant (87%) in pelvic injury.

CONCLUSION

Vascular damage is associated with high mortality rates especially in combination with pelvic fractures. Initial anemia, disturbed coagulation tests and the need for extensive pre-clinical fluid substitution were observed in the cohort with vascular damage. Therefore, fast diagnosis and early interventional and surgical procedures are necessary to optimize patient-specific outcome.

Prophylactic absorbable gelatin sponge embolization for angiographically occult splenic hemorrhage

Nonoperative management of traumatic splenic hemorrhage includes the targeted administration of embolic agents. In certain instances where computed tomography angiography cannot exclude a bleed, prophylactic embolization with absorbable gelatin sponge has been used. In this retrospective case series review, we characterized the demographic data and clinical outcomes associated with 4 patients who underwent prophylactic transarterial splenic artery embolization after blunt abdominal trauma. Embolization was employed in cases where computed tomography angiography findings suggested at least a moderate splenic injury, and simultaneously where hemorrhage was not apparent during fluoroscopic angiography. Periprocedural hemodynamic status, technical success, and postoperative complications are discussed. The goal of this report was to discuss the safety and efficacy of prophylactic gelatin sponge embolization for occult splenic hemorrhage. In cases where a hemorrhagic site might be occult, this approach has the potential to minimize bleeding complications and the need for further intervention.

Arterial Injury in the Upper Extremity: Evaluation, Strategies, and Anticoagulation Management

Trauma to the upper extremity can present with an associated arterial injury. After patient stabilization, thorough assessment with physical examination and various imaging modalities allows accurate diagnosis of the specific arterial injury. After diagnosis, efficient treatment is necessary to allow limb salvage. Treatment options include ligation, primary repair, graft reconstruction, endovascular repair, and amputation. The final treatment rendered is frequently dependent on injury location and mechanism. With any of the treatment options, complications may occur, including thrombosis. Currently, no validated anticoagulation protocol has been established for managing arterial injuries in the upper extremity.