Airway and ventilator management in trauma patients

Rotational therapy in thoracic injuries: what is the evidence?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current use of continuous lateral rotational therapy (CLRT) in patients with thoracic injuries and its impact on clinical course, complications and outcome.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patient positioning is a key factor in the treatment of severe thoracic injuries and CLRT, and intermittent supine and prone position are basic options. There is a lack of randomized controlled studies for trauma patients with chest injury undergoing kinetic therapy as standard of care. A positive effect of kinetic therapy for prevention of secondary respiratory complications has been reported; nevertheless, no positive effect on mortality or length of hospital stay could be affirmed so far. In general, standardized therapeutic regimes for treatment of chest trauma have been implemented, including ventilator settings and positioning therapy. However, the available data do not allow a clear recommendation for rotational/kinetic therapy or prone positioning as superior or inferior.

SUMMARY

The benefit of changing the patients' position for secret mobilization and recruitment of atelectasis after chest trauma and therefore preventing secondary complications seems to be self-evident. Since only few studies report about the utility of CLRT in critically ill chest trauma patients, randomized controlled multicenter trials are necessary to analyze the overall benefit of such means.

Increased mortality in trauma patients who develop postintubation hypotension

BACKGROUND

Postintubation hypotension (PIH) is common and associated with poor outcomes in critically ill patient populations requiring emergency endotracheal intubation (ETI). The importance of PIH in the trauma population remains unclear. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of PIH in trauma patients and assess the association of PIH with patient outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective case series of adult (≥16 years) patients who were intubated on arrival at a tertiary trauma center in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, between 2000 and 2015. Data were collected from the Nova Scotia Trauma Registry and patient chart, and included demographics, comorbidities, trauma characteristics, intubation time, as well as all fluids, medications, adverse events, interventions, and vital signs during the 15 minutes before/after ETI. We evaluated the prevalence of PIH and created a logistic regression model to determine likelihood of mortality in the PIH and non-PIH groups after controlling for patient and provider characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall, 477 patients required ETI on assessment by the trauma service, of which 444 patients met eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. The prevalence of PIH was 36.3% (161 of 444) in our study population. In-hospital mortality occurred in 29.8% (48 of 161) of patients in the PIH group, compared with 15.9% (45 of 283) of patients in the non-PIH group (p = 0.001). Development of PIH was associated with increased mortality in the emergency department (adjusted odds ratio, 3.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-8.36) and in-hospital (adjusted odds ratio, 1.83; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-3.31).

CONCLUSION

In our study of trauma patients requiring ETI, development of PIH was common (36.3%) and associated with increased mortality. Intubation practices in critically ill trauma patients is an important patient safety issue that requires further investigation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and epidemiological, level III; Level IV, Therapeutic.

Airway Management of the Patient with Maxillofacial Trauma: Review of the Literature and Suggested Clinical Approach

According to the Advanced Trauma Life Support recommendations for managing patients with life-threatening injuries, securing the airway is the first task of a primary caregiver. Airway management of patients with maxillofacial trauma is complex and crucial because it can dictate a patient's survival. Securing the airway of patients with maxillofacial trauma is often extremely difficult because the trauma involves the patient's airway and their breathing is compromised. In these patients, mask ventilation and endotracheal intubation are anticipated to be difficult. Additionally, some of these patients may not yet have been cleared of a cervical spine injury, and all are regarded as having a full stomach and having an increased risk of regurgitation and pulmonary aspiration. The requirements of the intended maxillofacial operation may often preclude the use of an oral intubation tube, and alternative methods for securing the airway should be considered before the start of the surgery. In order to improve the clinical outcome of patients with maxillofacial trauma, cooperation between maxillofacial surgeons, anesthesiologists, and trauma specialists is needed. In this review, we discuss the complexity and difficulties of securing the airway of patients with maxillofacial trauma and present our approach for airway management of such patients.