Time to aortic occlusion: It's all about access

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in the patient with obesity

BACKGROUND

Palpation of anatomic landmarks is difficult in patients with obesity, which could increase difficulty of achieving femoral access and resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) placement. The primary aim of this study was to examine the association between obesity and successful REBOA placement. We hypothesized that higher body mass index (BMI) would decrease first-attempt success and increase time to successful aortic occlusion (AO).

METHODS

A review of the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (AORTA) registry was performed on patients who underwent REBOA placement with initiation systolic blood pressure >0 mm Hg from years 2013-2022. Patients were excluded if they received cardiopulmonary resuscitation on arrival, underwent open AO, or missing data entries for variables of interest. Body mass index categorization was as follows: non-obese (<30), class I (30-34.9), class II (35-39.9), and class III (40+) obesity. Patients were also stratified by access technique, including use of palpation or ultrasound guidance.

RESULTS

Inclusion criteria were met by 410 patients. On binary analysis, no primary outcomes of interest, including rate of success, time to placement, or mortality, were significantly impacted by BMI. Among BMI subgroups, there was no statistical difference in injury severity, admission systolic blood pressure (SBP), or augmented SBP. At initiation of aortic occlusion, patients with class II and class III obesity had higher median SBP compared with non- and class I obese patients (p = 0.03). Body mass index subgroup did not impact likelihood of first-attempt success or conversion to open procedure. When stratified by access technique, there was no difference in success rates, time to success or mortality between groups.

CONCLUSION

Body habitus did not impact success of REBOA placement, time to successful AO, or mortality. Further, ultrasound guidance was not superior to landmark palpation for arterial access. Following traumatic injury without hemodynamic collapse, obesity should not deter providers from considering REBOA placement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care management, Observational, Cross-sectional; Level IV.

REBOA in trauma: a life-saving intervention or a spectacular failure?

PURPOSE

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a controversial haemorrhage control intervention often touted as the bridge to definitive haemorrhage control. This review summarizes the evolution of REBOA from its inception to the latest applications with an emphasis on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This is a narrative review based on a selective review of the literature.

RESULTS

REBOA remains a rarely utilized intervention in trauma patients. Complications have remained consistent over time despite purported improvements in catheter technology. Ischemia-reperfusion injuries, end-organ dysfunction, limb ischemia, and amputations have all been reported. Evidence-based guidelines are lacking, and appropriate indications and the ideal patient population for this intervention are yet to be defined.

CONCLUSION

Despite the hype, purported technological advancements, and the mirage of high-quality studies over the last decade, REBOA has failed to keep up to its expectations. The quest to find the solution for uncontrolled NCTH remains unsolved.

When Every Minute Counts: REBOA Before Surgery Is Independently Associated With a 15-Minute Delay in Time to Definitive Hemorrhage Control

INTRODUCTION

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a temporizing hemorrhage control intervention, but its inevitable effect on time to operating room (OR) has not been assessed. The aim of our study is to assess the impact of undergoing REBOA before surgery (RBS) on time to definitive hemorrhage control surgery.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis of 2017-2021 ACS-TQIP database, all adult (≥18 years) patients who underwent emergency hemorrhage control laparotomy (≤4 hours of admission) and received early blood products (≤4 hours) were included, and patients with severe head injury (Head-abbreviated injury score > 2) were excluded. Patients were stratified into those who did (RBS) vs those who did not undergo REBOA before surgery (No-RBS). Primary outcome was time to laparotomy. Secondary outcomes were complications and mortality. Multivariable linear and binary logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the independent associations between RBS and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 32,683 patients who underwent emergency laparotomy were identified (RBS: 342; No-RBS: 32,341). The mean age was 39 (16) years, 78% were male, mean SBP was 107 (34) mmHg, and the median injury severity score was 21 [14-29]. The median time to emergency hemorrhage control surgery was 50 [32-85] minutes. Overall complication rate was 16% and mortality was 19%. On univariate analysis, RBS group had longer time to surgery (RBS 56 [41-89] vs No-RBS 50 [32-85] minutes, P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, RBS was independently associated with a longer time to hemorrhage control surgery (β + 14.5 [95%CI 7.8-21.3], P < 0.001), higher odds of complications (aOR = 1.72, 95%CI = 1.27-2.34, P < 0.001), and mortality (aOR = 3.42, 95%CI = 2.57-4.55, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

REBOA is independently associated with longer time to OR for hemorrhaging trauma patients with an average delay of 15 minutes. Further research evaluating center-specific REBOA volume and utilization practices, and other pertinent system factors, may help improve both time to REBOA as well as time to definitive hemorrhage control across US trauma centers.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

STUDY TYPE

Epidemiologic.

Has the balloon really burst? Analysis of "the UK-REBOA randomized clinical trial"

BACKGROUND

Uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock is a leading cause of early death after injury. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) represents a paradigm shift in achieving hemodynamic stability and its implementation still remain controversial in different settings. The recently published UK-REBOA Randomized Clinical Trial aimed to determine the effectiveness of REBOA in patients with hemorrhagic shock, concluding its increased mortality compared with standard care alone.

METHODS

An adjustment of the statistical analysis was performed and a comprehensive analysis was proposed to address the study's limitations and demonstrate that these conclusions cannot be considered as benchmarks.

RESULTS

Primary and secondary outcomes were analyzed using Bayesian logistic regression and generalized linear models suitable for the outcome distribution. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups for the primary outcome (p-value 0.3341) nor in most of the secondary outcomes. The results of the principal stratum analyses (to account for intercurrent events) also did not show significant differences after the statistical analysis tests.

CONCLUSION

It cannot be stated that REBOA increases mortality compared with standard care alone in trauma patients with exsanguinating hemorrhage. Further studies and adequate simulation training programs in REBOA are critical to its successful implementation within a trauma system and to identify the optimum settings and patients.

Vascular complications secondary to resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta placement at a Level 1 Trauma Center

OBJECTIVE

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is designed to manage severe hemorrhagic shock. Popularized in medical care during military conflicts, the concept has emerged as a lifesaving technique that is utilized around the United States. Literature on risks of REBOA placement, especially vascular injuries, are not well-reported. Our goal was to assess the incidence of vascular injury from REBOA placement and the risk factors associated with injury and death among these patients at our institution.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent REBOA placement between September 2017 and June 2022 at our Level 1 Trauma Center. The primary outcome variable was the presence of an injury related to REBOA insertion or use. Secondary outcomes studied were limb loss, the need for dialysis, and mortality. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, χ2, and t-tests as appropriate for the variable type.

RESULTS

We identified 99 patients who underwent REBOA placement during the study period. The mean age of patients was 43.1 ± 17.2 years, and 67.7% (67/99) were males. The majority of injuries were from blunt trauma (79.8%; 79/99). Twelve of the patients (12.1%; 12/99) had a vascular injury related to REBOA placement. All but one required intervention. The complications included local vessel injury (58.3%; 7/12), distal embolization (16.7%; 2/12), excessive bleeding requiring vascular consult (8.3%; 1/12), pseudoaneurysm requiring intervention (8.3%; 1/12), and one incident of inability to remove the REBOA device (8.3%; 1/12). The repairs were performed by vascular surgery (75%; 9/12), interventional radiology (16.7%; 2/12), and trauma surgery (8.3%; 1/12). There was no association of age, gender, race, and blunt vs penetrating injury to REBOA-related complications. Mortality in this patient population was high (40.4%), but there was no association with REBOA-related complications. Ipsilateral limb loss occurred in two patients with REBOA-related injuries, but both were due to their injuries and not to REBOA-related ischemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Although vascular complications are not unusual in REBOA placement, there does not appear to be an association with limb loss, dialysis, or mortality if they are addressed promptly. Close coordination between vascular surgeons and trauma surgeons is essential in patients undergoing REBOA placement.

A Novel REBOA Training Curriculum for Emergency Medicine Residents: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) is a potentially life-saving intervention to treat noncompressible torso hemorrhage. Traditionally, REBOA use has been limited to surgeons. However, emergency physicians are often the first point-of-contact and are well-versed in obtaining rapid vascular access and damage control resuscitation, making them ideal candidates for REBOA training.

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To fill this gap, we designed and evaluated a REBOA training curriculum for emergency medicine (EM) residents.

METHODS

Participants enrolled in an accredited 4-year EM residency program (N = 11) completed a 12-hour REBOA training course. Day 1 included lectures, case studies, and hands-on training using REBOA task trainers and perfused cadavers. Day 2 included additional practice and competency evaluations. Assessments included a 25-item written knowledge exam, decision-making on case studies, REBOA placement success, and time-to-placement. Participants returned at 4 months to assess long-term retention. Data were analyzed using t-tests and nonparametric statistics at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Scores on a 25-item multiple choice test significantly increased from pre-training (65% ± 5%) to post-training (92% ± 1%), p < 0.001. On Day 2, participants scored 100% on correct recognition of REBOA indications and scored 100% on correct physical placement of REBOA. Exit surveys indicated increased preparedness, confidence, and support for incorporating this course into EM training. Most importantly, REBOA knowledge, correct recognition of REBOA indications, and correct REBOA placement skills were retained by the majority of participants at 4 months.

CONCLUSION

This course effectively teaches EM residents the requisite skills for REBOA competence and proper placement. This study could be replicated at other facilities with larger, more diverse samples, aiming to expand the use of REBOA in emergency physicians and reducing preventable deaths in trauma.

The Importance of Early Femoral Access When REBOA Catheter Must Be Removed Prior to Hemorrhage Control

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a tool for hemorrhage control. We describe a case where the REBOA Catheter needed to be removed prior to hemorrhage control. The patient is a 40-year-old man that presented following motor vehicle collision. A REBOA Catheter was placed via the right common femoral artery (CFA). CT scan demonstrated extravasation from the left inferior epigastric artery. The Interventional Radiology (IR) team would only be able to perform angioembolization via contralateral access where the REBOA Catheter was in place. Prior to removing the REBOA Catheter on the right, left CFA access was obtained in the event a new catheter needed to be deployed. Ultimately, IR performed angioembolization without a second REBOA Catheter. In gaining contralateral access prior to removing the REBOA Catheter, this case provides a strategy for expeditious replacement of REBOA Catheters in situations where the catheter interferes with hemorrhage control procedures.

Percutaneous ultrasound-guided versus open cut-down access to femoral vessels for the placement of a REBOA catheter

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) may be useful in treating exsanguinating trauma patients. This study seeks to compare rates of success, complications and time required for vascular access between ultrasound-guidance and surgical cut-down for femoral sheath insertion as a prospective observational case control study. Participating clinicians from either trauma surgery or anesthesiology were allocated to surgical cut-down or percutaneous ultrasound-guided puncture on a 1:1 ratio. Time spans to vessel identification, successful puncture, and balloon inflation were recorded. 80 study participants were recruited and allocated to 40 open cut-down approaches and 40 percutaneous ultrasound-guided approaches. REBOA catheter placement was successful in 18/40 cases (45%) using a percutaneous ultrasound guided technique and 33/40 times (83%) using the open cut-down approach (p < 0.001). Median times [in seconds] compared between percutaneous ultrasound-guided puncture and surgical cut-down were 36 (18-73) versus 117(56-213) for vessel visualization (p < 0.001), 136 (97-175) versus 183 (156-219) for vessel puncture (p < 0.001), and 375 (240-600) versus 288 (244-379) for balloon inflation (p = 0.08) overall. Access to femoral vessels for REBOA catheter placement is safer when performed by cut-down and direct visualization but can be performed faster by an ultrasound-guided technique when vessels can be identified clearly and rapidly.

The Role of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has been utilized by trauma surgeons at the bedside for over a decade in both civilian and military settings. Both translational and clinical research suggest it is superior to resuscitative thoracotomy for specific patient populations. Technological advancements in recent years have significantly enhanced the safety profile of REBOA. Resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta has also swiftly found implementation in patients in shock from non-traumatic hemorrhage.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta and resuscitative thoracotomy are associated with similar outcomes in traumatic cardiac arrest

BACKGROUND

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a minimally invasive alternative to resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) for patients with hemorrhagic shock. However, the potential benefits of this approach remain subject of debate. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of REBOA and RT for traumatic cardiac arrest.

METHODS

A planned secondary analysis of the United States Department of Defense-funded Emergent Truncal Hemorrhage Control study was performed. Between 2017 and 2018, a prospective observational study of noncompressible torso hemorrhage was conducted at six Level I trauma centers. Patients were dichotomized by REBOA or RT, and baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 454 patients were enrolled in the primary study, of which 72 patients were included in the secondary analysis (26 underwent REBOA and 46 underwent resuscitative thoracotomy). Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta patients were older, had a greater body mass index, and were less likely to be the victims of penetrating trauma. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta patients also had less severe abdominal injuries and more severe extremity injuries, although the overall injury severity scores were similar. There was no difference in mortality between groups (88% vs. 93%, p = 0.767). However, time to aortic occlusion was longer in REBOA patients (7 vs. 4 minutes, p = 0.001) and they required more transfusions of red blood cells (4.5 vs. 2.5 units, p = 0.007) and plasma (3 vs. 1 unit, p = 0.032) in the emergency department. After adjusted analysis, mortality remained similar between groups (RR, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.12, p = 0.304).

CONCLUSION

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta and RT were associated with similar survival after traumatic cardiac arrest, although time to successful aortic occlusion was longer in the REBOA group. Further research is needed to better define the role of REBOA in trauma.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Early Femoral Access by Acute Care Surgeons: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Prevent Maternal Exsanguination in Placenta Accreta Spectrum

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) use has expanded to the obstetric condition of placenta accreta spectrum (PAS). Early reports of REBOA for PAS describe prophylactic catheter deployment. We developed a multidisciplinary approach to PAS, with early femoral artery access and selective REBOA deployment. We compared morbidity, mortality, and blood loss before and after implementation of our multidisciplinary protocol for PAS. Prior to, femoral access was obtained only emergently, and maternal death occurred in 2/3 cases (66%). Following protocol implementation, there was one maternal death (6%). There were no access-related complications. We have not yet needed to deploy the REBOA during PAS cases. In contrast to urgent hemorrhage control or prophylactic REBOA deployment, routine early femoral arterial access and selective REBOA deployment as part of a multidisciplinary team approach is a novel strategy for managing PAS. Our experience suggests most PAS cases do not require prophylactic REBOA deployment.

Arterial Access Complications Following Percutaneous Femoral Access in 24-Hour Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta Survivors

INTRODUCTION

With the use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) comes the potential for vascular access site complications (VASCs) and limb ischemic sequelae. We aimed to determine the prevalence of VASC and associated clinical and technical factors.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis of 24-h survivors undergoing percutaneous REBOA via the femoral artery in the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute care surgery registry between Oct 2013 and Sep 2021 was performed. The primary outcome was VASC, defined as at least one of the following: hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, arterial stenosis, or the use of patch angioplasty for arterial closure. Associated clinical and procedural variables were examined. Data were analyzed using Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney-U tests, and linear regression.

RESULTS

There were 34 (7%) cases with VASC among 485 meeting inclusion criteria. Hematoma (40%) was the most common, followed by pseudoaneurysm (26%) and patch angioplasty (21%). No differences in demographics or injury/shock severity were noted between cases with and without VASC. The use of ultrasound (US) was protective (VASC, 35% versus no VASC, 51%; P = 0.05). The VASC rate in US cases was 12/242 (5%) versus 22/240 (9.2%) without US. Arterial sheath size >7 Fr was not associated with VASC. US use increased over time (R2 = 0.94, P < 0.001) with a stable rate of VASC (R2 = 0.78, P = 0.61). VASC were associated with limb ischemia (VASC, 15% versus no VASC, 4%; P = 0.006) and arterial bypass procedures (VASC 3% versus no VASC 0%; P < 0.001) but amputation was uncommon (VASC, 3% versus no VASC, 0.4%; P = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous femoral REBOA had a 7% VASC rate which was stable over time. VASC are associated with limb ischemia but need for surgical intervention and/or amputation is rare. The use of US-guided access appears to be protective against VASC and is recommended for use in all percutaneous femoral REBOA procedures.

Current state of interventional procedures to treat pernicious placenta previa accompanied by placenta accreta spectrum: A review

Pernicious placenta previa (PPP) accompanied by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) is a life-threatening placental implantation that causes a variety of complications, including antepartum hemorrhage, postpartum hemorrhage, hemorrhagic shock, preterm birth, and neonatal asphyxia. Along with continuous improvements in medical technology, interventional procedures have been widely used to prevent intraoperative hemorrhage associated with PPP. The commonly used interventional procedures include abdominal aorta clamping, prophylactic balloon occlusion of the internal or common iliac arteries, and uterine artery embolization. The above-mentioned interventional procedures have their respective advantages and disadvantages. The best procedure for different situations continues to be debated considering the complex pattern of blood supply to the uterus in patients with PPP. The specific choice of interventional procedure depends on the clinical situation of the patient with PPP. For grade III PAS, the need for uterine artery embolization is assessed based on blood loss and preoperative hemostatic effect following abdominal aorta clamping. Repair or hysterectomy may be performed following uterine artery embolization if there is a hybrid operating room for grade III PAS patients with extensive sub-serosal penetration of the uterus and repair difficulty. For grade II PAS (shallow placental implantation), prophylactic balloon occlusion may not be necessary before surgery. Uterine artery embolization can be performed in case of postoperative hemorrhage.

Resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta in the modern era: Expanding indications, optimal techniques, unresolved issues, and current results

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta has been used by trauma surgeons at the bedside for more than a decade in civilian and military settings. Translational and clinical research suggests it is superior to resuscitative thoracotomy for select patients. Clinical research suggests outcomes are superior in patients who received resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta compared with those who did not. Technology has advanced considerably in the past several years, leading to the improved safety profile and wider adoption of resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta. In addition to trauma patients, resuscitative balloon occlusion of the aorta has been rapidly implemented for patient with nontraumatic hemorrhage.

Efficacy of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta for hemorrhage control in patients with abnormally invasive placenta: a historical cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with abnormally invasive placenta (AIP) are at high risk of massive postpartum hemorrhage. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA), as an adjunct therapeutic strategy for hemostasis, offers the obstetrician an alternative for treating patients with AIP. This study aimed to evaluate the role of REBOA in hemorrhage control in patients with AIP.

METHODS

This was a historical cohort study with prospectively collected data between January 2014 to July 2021 at a single tertiary center. According to delivery management, 364 singleton pregnant AIP patients desiring uterus preservation were separated into two groups. The study group (balloon group, n = 278) underwent REBOA during cesarean section, whereas the reference group (n = 86) did not undergo REBOA. Surgical details and maternal outcomes were collected. The primary outcome was estimated blood loss and the rate of uterine preservation.

RESULTS

A total of 278 (76.4%) participants experienced REBOA during cesarean section. The patients in the balloon group had a smaller blood loss during cesarean Sect. (1370.5 [752.0] ml vs. 3536.8 [1383.2] ml; P < .001) and had their uterus salvaged more often (264 [95.0%] vs. 23 [26.7%]; P < .001). These patients were also less likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit after delivery (168 [60.4%] vs. 67 [77.9%]; P = .003) and had a shorter operating time (96.3 [37.6] min vs. 160.6 [45.5] min; P < .001). The rate of neonatal intensive care unit admission (176 [63.3%] vs. 52 [60.4%]; P = .70) and total maternal medical costs ($4925.4 [1740.7] vs. $5083.2 [1705.1]; P = .13) did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

As a robust hemorrhage-control technique, REBOA can reduce intraoperative hemorrhage in patients with AIP. The next step is identifying associated risk factors and defining REBOA inclusion criteria to identify the subgroups of AIP patients who may benefit more.

Partial Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta Limits Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury After Simulated Aeromedical Evacuation

INTRODUCTION

One of the advantages of partial Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (pREBOA) compared to the original model is the mitigation of reperfusion injury. The safety and efficacy of pREBOA have not been demonstrated in the setting of aeromedical evacuation. We hypothesized that the pREBOA would result in less ischemia-reperfusion injury after altitude exposure.

METHODS

Twenty-four swine underwent femur fracture with hemorrhage for 20 min, followed by resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) deployment to Zone 1 and were randomized to pREBOA-PRO (Prytime Medical Devices Inc) full inflation, partial inflation, or sham inflation and then an altitude exposure of ground level or 8000 ft for 15 min. The primary endpoint was to examine if the balloon functioned at altitude. Our secondary endpoint was investigating evidence of ischemia-reperfusion by hemodynamic instability, electrolyte derangements, and acidosis. Comparisons were made by ANOVA.

RESULTS

After deflation, the partially inflated group maintained a higher mean arterial pressure (MAP) compared to fully inflated group (P = 0.026). Full REBOA pigs were more tachycardic compared to sham pREBOA at ground (P < 0.001) and this was exacerbated at altitude (P < 0.001). Full REBOA pigs were more acidotic than sham and pREBOA at ground pigs (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0002, respectively). Altitude increased the acidosis in full REBOA pigs, resulting in a greater base deficit (P < 0.0001), lactate (P < 0.0001), and IL-6 (P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

PREBOA resulted in less severe ischemia-reperfusion injury at both altitude and ground, while full balloon inflation at altitude exacerbated acidosis and ischemia-reperfusion injury. Efforts should therefore be made to utilize partial balloon occlusion when employing the REBOA catheter.

A comparison of mortality and indicators of treatment success of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of aorta (REBOA): a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Emergency resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is a recognised method of controlling non-compressible torso haemorrhage (NCTH) often in adjunct to emergency surgery. Recently, there is much debate regarding resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of aorta (REBOA) on its role in civilian trauma cases in controlling NCTH. This study aims to provide an updated review on in-hospital mortality rates in patients who underwent REBOA versus RT and standard care without REBOA (non-REBOA) and to identify the potential indicators of REBOA survival.

Methods

Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were used to perform the study. All adult trauma cases were included, while pre-hospital, military and non-English studies were excluded. A literature search was done on studies from 01 January 2005 to 30 June 2020 using EMBASE, MEDLINE and COCHRANE databases. Risk of bias was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies (MINORS) tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model and the DerSimonian and Laird estimation method. A significance level of p < 0.05 was used.

Results

Twenty-five studies were included in this study. The odds of in-hospital mortality of patients who underwent REBOA compared to RT was 0.18 (p < 0.01, 0.12-0.26). The odds of in-hospital survival of patients who underwent REBOA compared to non-REBOA was 1.28 (p = 0.62, 0.46-3.53). There was a significant difference found between survivors and non-survivors in terms of their pre-REBOA systolic blood pressure (SBP) (19.26 mmHg, p < 0.01), post-REBOA SBP (20.73 mmHg, p < 0.01), duration of aortic occlusion (- 40.57 min, p < 0.01) and injury severity score (- 8.50, p < 0.01).

Conclusions

REBOA has a potential for wider application in civilian settings, with our study demonstrating lower in-hospital mortality compared to RT. Prospective multi-centre studies are needed for further evaluation of the indications and feasibility of REBOA.Level of Evidence + Study Type: Level IV. Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12055-022-01413-3.

Usefulness of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta compared to aortic cross-clamping in severely injured trauma patients: Analysis from the Japan Trauma Data Bank

Aim

To compare in-hospital mortality of severely injured trauma patients who underwent resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) or aortic cross-clamping (ACC).

Methods

In this multicenter, retrospective cohort study using data from a nationwide trauma registry of tertiary emergency medical centers in Japan (n = 280), trauma patients who underwent aortic occlusion at the emergency department from 2004 to 2019 were divided into two groups according to the treatment they received: patients treated with ACC and patients who underwent placement of a REBOA catheter. Multiple imputations were used to handle the missing data. In-hospital mortality of the patients who underwent REBOA or ACC was compared using a mixed-effect logistic regression analysis and a propensity score-matching analysis, in which the confounders, including baseline patient demographics and severity, were adjusted.

Results

Of 1,670 patients (1,137 with REBOA and 533 with ACC), 66% were male. The median age was 56 years, and the mortality rate was 55.2% in the REBOA group and 81.6% in the ACC group. The mixed-effect model regression analysis showed a significantly lower odds ratio for in-hospital mortality rate in the REBOA group (odds ratio 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.26). A similar odds ratio was observed in the propensity score matching analysis (odds ratio 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.40).

Conclusion

Compared with ACC, REBOA use was associated with decreased mortality in severely injured trauma patients.

Systematic review to evaluate algorithms for REBOA use in trauma and identify a consensus for patient selection

Background

Patient selection for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has evolved during the last decade. A recent multicenter collaboration to implement the newest generation REBOA balloon catheter identified variability in patient selection criteria. The aims of this systematic review were to compare recent REBOA patient selection guidelines and to identify current areas of consensus and variability.

Methods

In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for REBOA patient selection in trauma. Published algorithms from 2015 to 2022 and institutional guidelines from a seven-center REBOA collaboration were compiled and synthesized.

Results

Ten published algorithms and seven institutional guidelines on REBOA patient selection were included. Broad consensus exists on REBOA deployment for blunt and penetrating trauma patients with non-compressible torso hemorrhage refractory to blood product resuscitation. Algorithms diverge on precise systolic blood pressure triggers for early common femoral artery access and REBOA deployment, as well as the use of REBOA for traumatic arrest and chest or extremity hemorrhage control.

Conclusion

Although our convenience sample of institutional guidelines likely underestimates patient selection variability, broad consensus exists in the published literature regarding REBOA deployment for blunt and penetrating trauma patients with hypotension not responsive to resuscitation. Several areas of patient selection variability reflect individual practice environments.

Level of evidence

Level 5, systematic review.

Traumatic Cardiac Arrest: Scoping Review of Utilization of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) is increasingly used in trauma resuscitation for patients with life-threatening hemorrhage below the diaphragm and may also be used for patients with traumatic cardiac arrest (TCA). Resuscitative thoracotomy with aortic cross clamping (RT-ACC) maneuver was traditionally performed for patients with TCA due to hemorrhagic shock; however, REBOA has been substituted for RT-ACC in selected TCA cases. During cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in TCA, REBOA increases cerebral and coronary perfusion, and temporary bleeding control. Both animal and clinical studies have reported the efficacy of REBOA for TCA, and a recent observational study suggested that REBOA may contribute to the return of spontaneous circulation after TCA. Although multiple questions remain unanswered, REBOA has been applied to trauma fields as a novel technology.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta associated with improved survival in hemorrhagic shock

Background

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) is controversial as a hemorrhage control adjunct due to lack of data with a suitable control group. We aimed to determine outcomes of trauma patients in shock undergoing REBOA versus no-REBOA.

Methods

This single-center, retrospective, matched cohort study analyzed patients ≥16 years in hemorrhagic shock without cardiac arrest (2000–2019). REBOA (R; 2015–2019) patients were propensity matched 2:1 to historic (H; 2000–2012) and contemporary (C; 2013–2019) groups. In-hospital mortality and 30-day survival were analyzed using chi-squared and log rank testing, respectively.

Results

A total of 102,481 patients were included (R = 57, C = 88,545, H = 13,879). Propensity scores were assigned using age, race, mechanism, lowest systolic blood pressure, lowest Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), and body region Abbreviated Injury Scale scores to generate matched groups (R = 57, C = 114, H = 114). In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in the REBOA group (19.3%) compared to the contemporary (35.1%; p = 0.024) and historic (44.7%; p = 0.001) groups. 30-day survival was significantly higher in the REBOA versus no-REBOA groups.

Conclusion

In a high-volume center where its use is part of a coordinated hemorrhage control strategy, REBOA is associated with improved survival in patients with noncompressible torso hemorrhage.

REBOA utility

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta is a tool that can play an important role for the modern-day Trauma Surgeon. Although the concept of aortic balloon occlusion is not new, its use as a rescue device for managing life-threatening traumatic hemorrhage has increased dramatically. The ideal role for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta continues to evolve. In situations of noncompressible truncal hemorrhage, its use can temporize bleeding while other means of hemorrhage control, including those discussed elsewhere in this supplement, are used. However, it is a tool with potentially significant complications and consequences. Studies examining resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta are ongoing as, despite its ever-increasing adoption, quality evidence to support its clinical use is lacking.

High resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta procedural volume is associated with improved outcomes: An analysis of the AORTA registry

BACKGROUND

The use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is controversial. We hypothesize that REBOA outcomes are improved in centers with high REBOA utilization.

METHODS

We examined the Aortic Occlusion in Resuscitation for Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry over a 5-year period (2014-2018). Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta outcomes were analyzed by stratifying institutions into low-volume (<10), average-volume (11-30), and high-volume (>30) deployment centers. A multivariable model adjusting for volume group, mechanism of injury, signs of life, systolic blood pressure at initiation, operator level, device type, zone of placement, and hemodynamic response to aortic occlusion was created to analyze REBOA mortality and REBOA-related complications.

RESULTS

Four hundred ninety-five REBOA placements were included. High-volume centers accounted for 63%, while low accounted for 13%. High-volume institutions were more likely to place a REBOA in the emergency department (81% vs. 63% low volume, p = 0.003), had a lower mean systolic blood pressure at insertion (53 ± 38 vs. 64 ± 40, p = 0.001), and more Zone I deployments (64% vs. 55%, p = 0.002). Median time from admission to REBOA placement was significantly less in patients treated at high-volume centers (15 [7-30] minutes vs. 35 [20-65] minutes, p = 0.001). Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta mortality was significantly higher at low-volume centers (67% vs. 57%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.29; adj p = 0.040), while average- and high-volume centers were similar. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta complications were less frequent at high-/average-volume centers, but did not reach statistical significance (adj p = 0.784).

CONCLUSION

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta survival is increased at high versus low utilization centers. Increased experience with REBOA may be associated with earlier deployment and subsequently improved patient outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management, level IV.

Pelvic fracture-related hypotension: A review of contemporary adjuncts for hemorrhage control

ABSTRACT

Major pelvic hemorrhage remains a considerable challenge of modern trauma care associated with mortality in over a third of patients. Efforts to improve outcomes demand continued research into the optimal employment of both traditional and newer hemostatic adjuncts across the full spectrum of emergent care environments. The purpose of this review is to provide a concise description of the rationale for and effective use of currently available adjuncts for the control of pelvic hemorrhage. In addition, the challenges of defining the optimal order and algorithm for employment of these adjuncts will be outlined.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Review, level IV.

Predicting success of resuscitative endovascular occlusion of the aorta: Timing supersedes variable techniques in predicting patient survival

BACKGROUND

Resuscitative endovascular occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is used for temporary aortic occlusion of trauma patients in the management of noncompressible hemorrhage. Previous studies have focused on how to properly perform REBOA in the trauma environment to improve survival rates, but high-grade evidence defining the ideal patient population does not yet exist. This post hoc analysis of the Emergent Truncal Hemorrhage Control Study seeks to identify the most important clinical factors for physicians to consider when selecting for REBOA candidates and their potential survival following REBOA.

METHODS

Post hoc analysis of a large, multicenter, prospective observational study conducted at six level 1 trauma centers, 2017 to 2018, was performed. An onsite data collector documented all time points for REBOA patients since admission. Candidate predictors were demographics; injury severity; physiology preprocedure, during procedure, and postprocedure; cardiopulmonary resuscitation; and REBOA-specific variables (time to procedure, procedure-related time intervals, access site, technique, sheath size, catheter length, balloon volume, deployment zone). Predictive models for survival at three different time points along the trauma triage and REBOA process timeline ("Admission," "REBOA Initiation," and "Postaortic Occlusion") were devised by logistic regression.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients had REBOA placement. The Admission model selected age, Glasgow Coma Scale, and admission systolic blood pressure as significant predictors of survival (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.94). The REBOA Initiation and Postaortic Occlusion models selected age, Glasgow Coma Scale, and the systolic blood pressure measured just before balloon inflation as predictors for survival (AUROC, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.78-0.97] and AUROC, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.81-0.99], respectively). No REBOA procedural variables were identified as predictors of patient survival.

CONCLUSION

Only patient-specific criteria of age, neurologic status, and severity of shock predicted survival. The hemodynamic stability of the patient at the time REBOA is initiated is more important than how REBOA is initiated. These findings suggest that earlier preparation for REBOA placement may be a key to improved survival.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, level IV.

Emerging approaches to pre-hospital hemorrhage control: a narrative review

In the United States, trauma claims the lives of over 150,000 civilians each year. In military settings, trauma and exsanguination result in 50% of combat related deaths. The majority of these deaths result from uncontrolled non-compressible hemorrhage. Non-compressible hemorrhage often results from deep vascular injuries within the torso, however can also occur secondary to penetrating injuries that involve the extremities. Given the high mortality rates for non-compressible hemorrhage, rapid and effective management of patients suffering from hemorrhage is essential to good patient outcomes. Consequently, there has been increasing interest in solutions for point-of-injury hemorrhage control in trauma and military medicine. Undoubtedly there is a great need for prehospital hemostatic interventions that can be deployed by trained and untrained personnel. Since 2001, various hemostatic agents have been developed, each with its advantages based upon the type and severity of injury, wound size, wound location, accessibility to injury site, and the coagulation status of the patient. These agents are often used in the military setting as a temporizing measure prior to definitive therapy and include techniques such as resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) and bioengineered agents including ResQFoam, RevMedx’s XSTAT, Tranexamic acid (TXA), and QuikClot Combat Gauze (QCG). Here, we review the indications, composition, technique, efficacy, and outcomes of these hemostatic agents.

Is resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta for computed tomography diagnosis feasible or not? A Japanese single-center, retrospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

Advances in medical equipment have resulted in changes in the management of severe trauma. The role of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in this scenario is still unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the usage of REBOA and utility of computed tomography (CT) in the setting of aortic occlusion in our current trauma management.

METHODS

This Japanese single-tertiary center, retrospective, and observational study analyzed 77 patients who experienced severe trauma and persistent hypotension between October 2014 and March 2020.

RESULTS

All patients required urgent hemostasis. Twenty patients underwent REBOA, 11 underwent open aortic cross-clamping, and 46 did not undergo aortic occlusion. Among patients who underwent aortic occlusion, 19 patients underwent prehemostasis CT, and 7 patients underwent operative exploration without prehemostasis CT for identifying active bleeding sites. The 24-hour and 28-day survival rates in patients who underwent CT were not inferior to those in patients who did not undergo CT (24-hour survival rate, 84.2% vs. 57.1%; 28-day survival rate, 47.4% vs. 28.6%). Moreover, the patients who underwent CT had less discordance between primary hemostasis site and main bleeding site compared with patients who did not undergo CT (5% vs. 71.4%, p = 0.001). In the patients who underwent prehemostasis CT, REBOA was the most common approach of aortic occlusion. Most of the bleeding control sites were located in the retroperitoneal space. There were many patients who underwent interventional radiology for hemostasis.

CONCLUSION

In a limited number of patients whose cardiac arrests were imminent and in whom no active bleeding sites could be clearly identified without CT findings, REBOA for CT diagnosis may be effective; however, further investigations are needed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management study, level V.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in combat casualties: The past, present, and future

BACKGROUND

Noncompressible torso hemorrhage is a leading cause of preventable death on the battlefield. Intra-aortic balloon occlusion was first used in combat in the 1950s, but military use was rare before Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. During these wars, the combination of an increasing number of deployed vascular surgeons and a significant rise in deaths from hemorrhage resulted in novel adaptations of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) technology, increasing its potential application in combat. We describe the background of REBOA development in response to a need for minimally invasive intervention for hemorrhage control and provide a detailed review of all published cases (n = 47) of REBOA use for combat casualties. The current limitations of REBOA are described, including distal ischemia and reperfusion injury, as well as ongoing research efforts to adapt REBOA for prolonged use in the austere setting.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V.

Feasibility and Clinical Outcome of Reboa in Patients with Impending Traumatic Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUND

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) may improve Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) in hypovolemic shock. It has, however, not been studied in patients with impending traumatic cardiac arrest (ITCA). We aimed to study the feasibility and clinical outcome of REBOA in patients with ITCA using data from the ABOTrauma Registry.

METHODS

Retrospective and prospective data on the use of REBOA from 16 centers globally were collected. SBP was measured both at pre- and post-REBOA inflation. Data collected included patients' demography, vascular access technique, number of attempts, catheter size, operator, zone and duration of occlusion, and clinical outcome.

RESULTS

There were 74 patients in this high-risk patient group. REBOA was performed on all patients. A 7-10Fr catheter was used in 66.7% and 58.5% were placed on the first attempt, 52.1% through blind insertion and 93.2% inflated in Zone I, 64.8% for a period of 30 to 60 min, 82.1% by ER doctors, trauma surgeons, or vascular surgeons. SBP significantly improved to 90 mm Hg following the inflation of REBOA. 36.6% of the patients survived.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study has shown that REBOA may be performed in patients with ITCA, SBP can be elevated, and 36.6% of the patients survived if REBOA placement is successful.

A multidisciplinary approach and implementation of a specialized hemorrhage control team improves outcomes for placenta accreta spectrum

INTRODUCTION

The main complication of placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) is massive bleeding. Endoarterial occlusion techniques have been incorporated into the management of this pathology. Our aim was to examine the endovascular practice patterns among PAS patients treated during a 9-year period in a low-middle income country in which an interdisciplinary group's technical skills were improved with the creation of a PAS team.

METHODOLOGY

A retrospective cohort study including all PAS patients treated from December 2011 to November 2020 was performed. We compared the clinical results obtained according to the type of endovascular device used (group 1, internal iliac artery occlusion balloons; group 2, resuscitative endovascular balloons of the aorta; group 3, no arterial balloons due to low risk of bleeding) and according to the year in which they were attended (reflects the PAS team level of experience). A fourth group of comparisons included the woman diagnosed during a cesarean delivery and treated in a nonprotocolized way.

RESULTS

A total of 113 patients were included. The amount of blood loss decreased annually, with a median of 2,500 mL in 2014 (when endovascular occlusion balloons were used in all patients) and 1,394 mL in 2020 (when only 38.5% of the patients required arterial balloons). Group 3 patients (n = 16) had the lowest bleeding volume (1,245 mL) and operative time (173 minutes) of the entire population studied. Group 2 patients (n = 46) had a bleeding volume (mean, 1,700 mL) and transfusions frequency (34.8%) slightly lower than group 1 patients (n = 30) (mean of 2,000 mL and 50%, respectively). They also had lower hysterectomy frequency (63% vs. 76.7% in group 1) and surgical time (205 minutes vs. 275 in group 1) despite a similar frequency of confirmed PAS and S2 compromise.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular techniques used for bleeding control in PAS patients are less necessary as interdisciplinary groups improve their surgical and teamwork skills.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic care management, level III.

State-of-the-Art Review-Endovascular Resuscitation

ABSTRACT

The emerging concept of endovascular resuscitation applies catheter-based techniques in the management of patients in shock to manipulate physiology, optimize hemodynamics, and bridge to definitive care. These interventions hope to address an unmet need in the care of severely injured patients, or those with refractory non-traumatic cardiac arrest, who were previously deemed non-survivable. These evolving techniques include Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of Aorta, Selective Aortic Arch Perfusion, and Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and there is a growing literature base behind them. This review presents the up-to-date techniques and interventions, along with their application, evidence base, and controversy within the new era of endovascular resuscitation.

Therapeutic cardiac arrest as an adjunct to resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta: Bridging the gap from fatal hemorrhage to definitive surgical control in swine

BACKGROUND

Uncontrolled hemorrhage is the leading cause of potentially survivable combat casualty mortality, with 86.5% of cases resulting from noncompressible torso hemorrhage. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a minimally invasive technique used to stabilize patients with noncompressible torso hemorrhage; however, its application can take an average of 8 minutes to place. One therapeutic capable of bridging this gap is adenosine-lidocaine-magnesium (ALM), which at high doses induces a reversible cardioplegia. We hypothesize by using ALM as an adjunct to REBOA, the ALM-induced cardiac arrest will temporarily halt exsanguination and reduce blood loss, allowing for REBOA placement and control of bleeding.

METHODS

Male Yorkshire swine (60-80 kg) were randomly assigned to REBOA only or ALM-REBOA (n = 8/group). At baseline, uncontrolled hemorrhage was induced via a 1.5-cm right femoral arteriotomy, and hemorrhaged blood was quantified. One minute after injury (S1), ALM was administered, and 7 minutes later (T0), zone 1 REBOA inflation occurred. If cardiac arrest ensued, cardiac function either recovered spontaneously or advanced life support was initiated. At T30, surgical hemostasis was obtained, and REBOA was deflated. Animals were resuscitated until they were humanely euthanized at T90.

RESULTS

During field care phase, heart rate and end-tidal CO2 of the ALM-REBOA group were significantly lower than the REBOA only group. While mean arterial pressure significantly decreased from baseline, no significant differences between groups were observed throughout the field care phase. There was no significant difference in survival between the two groups (ALM-REBOA = 89% vs. REBOA only = 100%). Total blood loss was significantly decreased in the ALM-REBOA group (REBOA only = 24.32 ± 1.89 mL/kg vs. ALM-REBOA = 17.75 ± 2.04 mL/kg, p = 0.0499).

CONCLUSION

Adenosine-lidocaine-magnesium is a novel therapeutic, which, when used with REBOA, can significantly decrease the amount of blood loss at initial presentation, without compromising survival. This study provides proof of concept for ALM and its ability to bridge the gap between patient presentation and REBOA placement.

Ultrasound-guided versus blind vascular access followed by REBOA on board of a medical helicopter in a hemorrhagic ovine model

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of en-route resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) on board of a helicopter.

METHODS

Six sedated male sheep (weighing 42-54 kg) underwent a controlled hemorrhage until the systolic blood pressure (BP) dropped to <90 mmHg, and were placed into a low capacity Eurocopter AS-350 (France). During the 30-minutes normal flight, every animal underwent blind (left side) and ultrasound-guided (US) (right side) vascular access (VA) to the femoral artery followed by REBOA: the first catheter (Rescue balloon, Japan) - into Zone I, the second one (MIT, Russia) - Zone III. In case of blind VA failure, an alternate US-puncture was attempted. Six experienced flight anesthetists were enrolled into the study. Vascular access and REBOA catheter placement (confirmed by X-Ray later) success rate and timing were recorded.

RESULTS

Among six blind punctures one was successful, 2/6 - were into the vein, 3/6 - completely failed and switched to US-punctures (making total number of US-punctures nine). Eight out of nine US-punctures were successful. However, correct wire insertion and sheath placement was performed in 1/6 animal in the 'blind' group and only in 6/9 animals in the 'US' group. It took a median of 65 seconds (range 5-260) for US-puncture and a median of 4 minutes to get the sheath in. Among the 9 VAs, there were 2 REBOA failures (1 ruptured balloon [MIT] and 1 mistaken vena cava placement primarily recognized by a sudden drop of BP and later confirmed by X-Ray). Five out of seven balloons were placed in a desired intra-aortic position: 4/5 in Zone I and 1/2 - in Zone III. A median time for a successful REBOA procedure was 5.0 (range 2.5-10.0) minutes (1 min after sheath placement).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates the potential feasibility of the en-route REBOA which can be performed within 5 minutes. Ultrasound-guidance is critically important to achieve en-route VA.

Size matters: first-in-human study of a novel 4 French REBOA device

Background

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is an emerging technique used for non-compressible torso hemorrhage. However, its current use continues to be limited and there is a need for a simple, fast, and low profile REBOA device. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of a novel 4 French REBOA device called the COBRA-OS (Control of Bleeding, Resuscitation, Arterial Occlusion System).

Methods

This study is the first-in-human feasibility trial of the COBRA-OS. Due to the difficulty of trialing the device in the trauma setting, we performed a feasibility study using organ donors (due to the potential usefulness of the COBRA-OS for normothermic regional perfusion) after neurological determination of death (NDD) prior to organ retrieval. Bilateral 4 French introducer sheaths were placed in both femoral arteries and the COBRA-OS was advanced up the right side and deployed in the thoracic aorta (Zone 1). Once aortic occlusion was confirmed via the left-sided arterial line, the device was deflated, moved to the infrarenal aorta (Zone 3), and redeployed.

Results

A total of 7 NDD organ donors were entered into the study, 71% men, with a mean age 46.6 years (range 26 to 64). The COBRA-OS was able to occlude the aorta in Zones 1 and 3 in all patients. The mean time of placing a 4 French sheath was 47.7 seconds (n=13, range 28 to 66 seconds). The mean time from skin to Zone 1 aortic occlusion was 70.1 seconds (range 58 to 105 seconds); mean balloon volumes were 15 mL for Zone 1 (range 13 to 20 mL) and 9 mL for Zone 3 (range 6 to 15 mL); there were no complications and visual inspection of the aorta in all patients revealed no injury.

Discussion

The COBRA-OS is a novel 4 French REBOA device that has demonstrated fast and safe aortic occlusion in this first-in-human feasibility study.

Level of evidence

Level V, therapeutic.

Leaning forward: Early arterial access promotes resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta utilization in battlefield casualties

Uncontrolled noncompressible torso hemorrhage remains a leading cause of potentially preventable death on the battlefield. The utilization of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) has gained considerable traction in civilian and military trauma care. Establishment of arterial access remains the rate-limiting step in endovascular aortic occlusion. The decision to place arterial access, including size, location, and the appropriate clinician and scenario all must be considered to achieve the optimal patient outcome. This report is submitted by the Joint Medical Augmentation Unit, an elite surgical/resuscitation team that provides medical care in the most far-forward, austere environments in the special operations community. The authors highlight two cases where early arterial access, REBOA utilization, and massive blood transfusion with damage-control surgery were associated with patient survival. We also address the prehospital application of REBOA in battlefield trauma. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Special Report, Level V.

A Low-Cost Insertion Trainer for Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA)

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is an emergency procedure designed to treat non-compressible torso hemorrhage. Because this is a high-acuity low-occurrence event, it is difficult to train providers on the procedure and difficult for trained providers to stay proficient. Our primary objective was to develop a low-cost, high-fidelity teaching model to increase emergency medicine (EM) resident knowledge, confidence, and proficiency in performing REBOA. We utilized readily available materials to allow for ease of replication and cost-effectiveness. The aorta was simulated by a bicycle tire inner tube, and the femoral artery was simulated by natural rubber tubing. Once connected, these simulated vascular structures were threaded through a plastic torso mold and filled with simulated blood. Participants then performed the REBOA procedure with very little time required for reset between participants. After completing the training using our model, participants completed a survey rating aspects of the session on a five-point Likert scale. Participants included 21 EM residents from all levels of training. Participants rated the fidelity of the REBOA insertion trainer very highly (mean = 4.05, SD 0.67) and felt that the training was overall very useful (mean = 4.29, SD 0.56). Comments regarding the model were universally positive. We present a novel low-cost REBOA task trainer that is easy to build, reusable, and portable, and can be utilized either in a hospital or austere training environment.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta and traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A nationwide study

OBJECTIVE

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a less-invasive method for temporary hemostasis compared with cross-clamping the aorta through resuscitative thoracotomy (RT). Although the survival benefits of REBOA remained unclear, pathophysiological benefits were identified in patients with traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (t-OHCA). We examined the clinical outcomes of t-OHCA with the hypothesis that REBOA would be associated with higher survival to discharge compared with RT.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Japan Trauma Data Bank (2004-2019). Adult patients with t-OHCA who had arrived without a palpable pulse and undergone aortic occlusion were included. Patients were divided into REBOA or RT groups, and propensity scores were developed using age, mechanism of injury, presence of signs of life, presence of severe head and/or chest injury, Injury Severity Score, and transportation time. Inverse probability weighting by propensity scores was performed to compare survival to discharge between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Among 13,247 patients with t-OHCA, 1483 were included in this study. A total of 144 (9.7%) patients were treated with REBOA, and 5 of 144 (3.5%) in the REBOA group and 10 of 1339 (0.7%) in the RT group survived to discharge. The use of REBOA was significantly associated with increased survival to discharge (odds ratio, 4.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.61-14.19), which was confirmed by inverse probability weighting (adjusted odds ratio, 3.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.90-7.32).

CONCLUSIONS

REBOA for t-OHCA was associated with higher survival to discharge. These results should be validated by further research.

Prospective Observational Evaluation of the ER-REBOA Catheter at 6 U.S. Trauma Centers

OBJECTIVE

To describe the current use of the ER-REBOA catheter and associated outcomes and complications.

INTRODUCTION

Noncompressible truncal hemorrhage is the leading cause of potentially preventable death in trauma patients. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a novel strategy to obtain earlier temporary hemorrhage control, supporting cardiac, and cerebral perfusion before definitive hemostasis.

METHODS

Prospective, observational study conducted at 6 Level 1 Trauma Centers over 12-months. Inclusion criteria were age >15 years of age with evidence of truncal hemorrhage below the diaphragm and decision for emergent hemorrhage control intervention within 60 minutes of arrival. REBOA details, demographics, mechanism of injury, complications, and outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 8166 patients were screened for enrollment. In 75, REBOA was utilized for temporary hemorrhage control. Blunt injury occurred in 80% with a median injury severity score (ISS) 34 (21, 43). Forty-seven REBOAs were placed in Zone 1 and 28 in Zone 3. REBOA inflation increased systolic blood pressure from 67 (40, 83) mm Hg to 108 (90, 128) mm Hg 5 minutes after inflation (P = 0.02). Cardiopulmonary resuscitation was ongoing during REBOA insertion in 17 patients (26.6%) and 10 patients (58.8%) had return of spontaneous circulation after REBOA inflation. The procedural complication rate was 6.6%. Overall mortality was 52%.

CONCLUSION

REBOA can be used in blunt and penetrating trauma patients, including those in arrest. Balloon inflation uniformly improved hemodynamics and was associated with a 59% rate of return of spontaneous circulation for patients in arrest. Use of the ER-REBOA catheter is technically safe with a low procedural complication rate.

Can Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta Fly? Assessing Aortic Balloon Performance for Aeromedical Evacuation

BACKGROUND

Noncompressible torso hemorrhage remains a leading cause of death. Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) placement may occur before transport; however, its efficacy has not been demonstrated at altitude. We hypothesized that changes in altitude would not result in blood pressure changes proximal to a deployed REBOA.

METHODS

A simulation model for 7Fr guidewireless REBOA was used at altitudes up to 22,000 feet. Female pigs then underwent hemorrhagic shock to a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 40 mm Hg. After hemorrhage, a REBOA catheter was deployed in the REBOA group and positioned but not inflated in the no-REBOA group. Animals underwent simulated aeromedical evacuation at 8000 ft or were left at ground level. After altitude exposure, the balloon was deflated, and the animals were observed.

RESULTS

Taking the REBOA catheter to 22,000 ft in the simulation model resulted in a lower systolic blood pressure but a preserved MAP. In the porcine model, REBOA increased both systolic blood pressure and MAP compared with no-REBOA (P < 0.05) and was unaffected by altitude. No differences in postflight blood pressure, acidosis, or systemic inflammatory response were observed between ground and altitude REBOA groups.

CONCLUSIONS

REBOA maintained MAP up to 22,000 feet in an inanimate model. In the porcine model, REBOA deployment improved MAP, and the balloon remained effective at altitude.

Guidelines for a system-wide multidisciplinary approach to institutional resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta implementation

Resuscitative endovascular occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a rapidly evolving technology which requires careful system-wide multidisciplinary implementation for optimal success. These guidelines developed by experienced REBOA practitioners provide a framework for a key practitioner to use in the development of a REBOA program in their institution. They detail the importance of involving doctors, nurses, and staff across departments and disciplines in the application of this technique.

Practice, Practice, Practice! Effect of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta Volume on Outcomes: Data From the AAST AORTA Registry

BACKGROUND

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is an endovascular adjunct to hemorrhage control. Success relies on institutional support and focused training in arterial access. We hypothesized that hospitals with higher REBOA volumes will be more successful than low-volume hospitals at aortic occlusion with REBOA.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study from the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery Registry from November 2013 to January 2018. Patients aged ≥18 y who underwent REBOA were included. Successful placement of REBOA catheters (defined as hemodynamic improvement with balloon inflation) was compared between high-volume (≥80 cases; two hospitals), mid-volume (10-20 cases; four hospitals), and low-volume (<10 cases; 14 hospitals) hospitals, adjusting for patient factors.

RESULTS

Of 271 patients from 20 hospitals, 210 patients (77.5%) had successful REBOA placement. Most patients were male (76.0%) and sustained blunt trauma (78.1%). cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was ongoing at the time of REBOA placement in 34.5% of patients. Inpatient mortality was 67.4%, unchanged by hospital volume. Multivariable logistic regression found increased odds of successful REBOA placement at high-volume versus low-volume hospitals (odds ratio [OR], 7.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.10-27.29; P = 0.002) and mid-volume versus low-volume hospitals (OR, 7.82; 95% CI, 1.52-40.31; P = 0.014) and decreased odds among patients undergoing CPR during REBOA placement (OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.03-0.34; P < 0.001) when adjusting for age, sex, mechanism of injury, prehospital CPR, CPR on admission, transfer status, hospital location of REBOA placement, Glasgow Coma Scale ≤ 13, and injury severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitals with higher REBOA volumes were more likely to achieve hemodynamic improvement with REBOA inflation. However, mortality and complication rates were unchanged. Independent of hospital volume, ongoing CPR is associated with a decreased odds of successful REBOA placement.

The REBOA window: a cadaveric study delineating the optimum site for austere cannulation of the femoral artery for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta

INTRODUCTION

Haemorrhage is the major cause of early mortality following traumatic injury. Patients suffering from non-compressible torso haemorrhage are more likely to suffer early death. Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) can be effective in initial resuscitation; however, establishing swift arterial access is challenging, particularly in a severe shock. This is made more difficult by anatomical variability of the femoral vessels.

METHODS

The femoral vessels were characterised in 81 cadaveric lower limbs, measuring specifically the distance from the inferior border of the inguinal ligament to the distal part of the origin of the profunda femoris artery (PFA), and from the distal part of the origin of the PFA to where the femoral vein lies posterior to and is completely overlapped by the femoral artery.

RESULTS

The femoral vein lay deep to the femoral artery at a mean distance of 105 mm from the inferior border of the inguinal ligament. The PFA arose from the femoral artery at a mean distance of 51.1 mm from the inguinal ligament. From the results, it is predicted that the PFA originates from the common femoral artery approximately 24 mm from the inguinal ligament, and the femoral vein is completely overlapped by the femoral artery by 67.7 mm distal from the inguinal ligament, in 95% of subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results, proposed is an 'optimal access window' of up to 24 mm inferior to the inguinal ligament for common femoral arterial catheterisation for pre-hospital REBOA, or more simply within one finger breadth.