Intravenous and Intraosseous Blood Transfusion With Three Different Pediatric Pressure Transfusion Strategies in an Immature Swine (Sus scrofa) Model of Hemorrhagic Shock: A Pilot Study

Prehospital Massive Transfusion for Resuscitation of an Entrapped Patient in a Rural Setting: A Case Report

Resuscitation of injured patients suffering from hemorrhagic shock with blood products in the prehospital environment is becoming more commonplace. However, blood product utilization is typically restricted and can be exhausted in the event of a prolonged entrapment. Delivery of large amounts of blood products to a scene is rare, particularly in rural settings. We present the case of a 26-year-old male who was entrapped in a motor vehicle for 144 min. First responders assessed the entrapped patient to be in hemorrhagic shock from lower extremities injuries. The Helicopter Emergency Medical Services team exhausted their supply of blood products shortly after arrival on scene. The local trauma center's Surgical Emergency Response Team (SERT) was requested to the scene. The preplanned response included seven units of blood components to provide massive transfusion at the point of injury and released directly to field responders by the blood bank. During extrication, the patient was given two units of packed red blood cells by initial responders with three more units of blood components from the SERT supply. During transfer to the hospital, the patient received an additional three units, and four units were transfused on initial trauma resuscitation in the hospital. He was found to have severe lower extremities injuries as the cause of his hemorrhage. The patient survived to hospital discharge. Delivery of large volumes of blood products to an entrapped patient with prolonged extrication time may be a lifesaving intervention. We advocate for integration of blood bank services and on scene physician guided resuscitation for prolonged extrications.

Comparative Analysis of Whole Blood Infusion Effects: Assessing LifeFlow Versus Pressure Bag in a Sus scrofa Model

BACKGROUND

To improve survival for hemorrhagic shock treatment, guidelines emphasize two patient care priorities: (1) immediate hemorrhage control and (2) early resuscitation with whole blood or blood products. The LifeFlow device is designed to rapidly infuse blood products. However, the effects of using this device compared to pressure-bag systems remain unclear. We hypothesize that there will be no laboratory-measured difference with the blood when infused through the LifeFlow versus the current standard pressure bag system.

METHODS

Two units of fresh whole blood were obtained from a sus scrofa model. One unit was "infused" using the LifeFlow with the other unit used as a control through a standard pressure bag system into an empty bag. The "before" measurements were obtained from blood samples from a standard fresh whole blood collection bag. The blood was "infused" into a whole blood bag devoid of storage solution from which the "after" measurements were obtained.

RESULTS

This study utilized 22 clinically healthy sus scrofa. Blood units were primarily obtained from a left subclavian central line (50.0%). The median time to acquire and administer a unit of blood was similar for both the LifeFlow device (8.4 min and 8.1 min) and the pressure bag (8.7 min and 7.4 min). No significant differences were found in the total time to acquire or administer blood between the two devices. The median volume of blood acquired was 500 mL for both groups. While no significant differences in blood parameters were observed between the two devices, significant differences were noted when comparing pre- and post-transfusion values within each device. For the LifeFlow device, an increase in hemoglobin and chloride levels and a decrease in thromboplastin time and glucose levels were observed. With the pressure bag, only a decrease in blood urea nitrogen was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In comparing the LifeFlow to the pressure bag, there were no significant differences noted in the total time to acquire or administer a whole unit of blood. However, there were differences with several laboratory parameters of unclear clinical significance.

A Pilot Medic-based Assessment of the Novel Handheld LifeFlow Device for Rapid Infusion of Blood Products

INTRODUCTION

Uncontrolled hemorrhage remains the leading cause of preventable death in the prehospital, combat setting. Treatment guidelines emphasize immediate hemorrhage control and early resuscitation with whole blood or blood products. Current methods for the delivery of blood products are often insufficient to provide trauma resuscitation. The novel LifeFlow device is a hand-powered device that can rapidly infuse fluids, including blood products. However, successful use of this device in the hands of the intended end user has not been demonstrated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a pilot study to assess how quickly and effectively medics could set up the LifeFlow device and infuse mock blood products into a casualty. They were provided with a brief block of instruction (<10 min) and the opportunity to handle the device. The time to set up the device and proportion of successful completion were recorded. Participants were surveyed regarding the use of the device including post-study interview.

RESULTS

Forty medics, who were recruited and eligible to participate, completed the study procedures. All medics were able to successfully set up the device and perform the infusion. We had two instances of fluid leakage owing to malfunctions with the simulation arm, not the LifeFlow device. The mean time to device setup was 112 s (95% confidence interval [CI], 101-124). The mean time for infusion of 500 mL of fluid was 94 s (95% CI, 83-105). The mean time for all procedures was 197 s (95% CI, 178-213). On product feedback, they generally found it easier to use, easy to manipulate, possessing a useful grip, easily set up, and requiring minimal training.

CONCLUSIONS

The medics were able to reliably assemble and use the LifeFlow rapid infusion device. However, there were concerns about the packaging and the single indication for the device.

Application Times, Placement Accuracy, and User Ratings of Commercially Available Manual and Battery-Powered Intraosseous Catheters in a High Bone Density Cadaveric Swine Model

INTRODUCTION

Intraosseous (IO) infusion, the pressurized injection of fluids into bone through a catheter, is a life-preserving resuscitative technique for treating trauma patients with severe hemorrhage. However, little is known regarding the application times, placement accuracy, and end-user ratings of battery-powered and manual IO access devices. This study was specifically designed to fill these knowledge gaps on six FDA-approved IO access devices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three experienced U.S. Navy Emergency Medicine residents each placed commercially available 15-gauge IO catheters in cadaveric swine (Sus scrofa) proximal humeri and sternums in a randomized prospective experimental design. Devices included the battery-powered EZ-IO Rapid Infuser and the manual Jamshidi IO, PerSys NIO, SAM Manual IO, Tactical Advanced Lifesaving IO Needle (TALON), and PYNG First Access for Shock and Trauma 1 (30 trials per device, 10 per user, 210 total trials). Application times, placement accuracy in medullary (zone 1) and trabecular (zone 2) bone while avoiding cortical (zone 3) bone, and eight subjective user ratings were analyzed using ANOVA and nonparametric statistics at P < .05.

RESULTS

The EZ-IO demonstrated the fastest application times, high rates in avoiding zone 3, and the highest user ratings (P < .0001). The TALON conferred intermediate placement times, highest rates of avoiding zone 3, and second-highest user ratings. The SAM Manual IO and Jamshidi performed poorly, with mixed results for the PerSys NIO and PYNG First Access for Shock and Trauma 1.

CONCLUSIONS

The battery-powered EZ-IO performed best and remains the IO access device of choice. The present findings suggest that the TALON should be considered as a manual backup to the EZ-IO.

Red cell haemolysis secondary to intraosseous (IO) blood transfusion in adult patients with major trauma: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Intraosseous (IO) administration of medications and blood products is accepted practice in major trauma when intravenous access is not immediately available. However, there is a concern that the high infusion pressures required for IO transfusion may increase the risk of red cell haemolysis and its associated complications. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesise the existing evidence describing the risks of red cell haemolysis in IO blood transfusion.

METHODS

We undertook a systematic search of MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE using the search terms: "intraosseous transfusion" and "haemolysis". Two authors independently screened abstracts, and reviewed full-text articles against the inclusion criteria. Reference lists of included studies were reviewed and a grey literature search undertaken. Studies were assessed for risk of bias. Inclusion criteria were: all human and animal study types that reported novel data on IO-associated red cell haemolysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline was used.

RESULTS

Twenty-three abstracts were identified; n=9 full papers met the inclusion criteria. No further studies were identified from reference lists or grey literature. These papers included: seven large animal translational studies, a prospective and a retrospective human study. The overall risk of bias was high. One animal study with good translatability to adult patients with trauma demonstrated haemolysis. Other animal studies had methodological constraints that limit their human applicability. No haemolysis was observed in low-density flat bones (sternum), whereas haemolysis was reported in long bones (humerus, tibia). IO infusion using a three-way tap was associated with haemolysis. Conversely, pressure bag transfusion was not associated with haemolysis, but this method may result in insufficient flow rates for effective resuscitation.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a paucity of high-quality evidence surrounding the risks of red cell haemolysis in IO blood transfusion. However, evidence from one study suggests that the likelihood is increased by use of a three-way tap to administer blood transfusion to young adult male patients with trauma. Further research is needed to address this important clinical question.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022318902.