A collaborative research system for functional outcomes following wartime extremity vascular injury

Temporary arterial shunts in combat patient with vascular injuries to extremities wounded in Russian-Ukrainian war: A case report

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Vascular injuries to extremities are common in armed conflicts. Such kind of injury is associated with a high risk of critical ischemia, limb amputation, and high morbidity. There is a clinical challenge for the management of vascular injuries to extremities in ongoing warfare due to limited medical resources.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 34 years old male received a gunshot injury to both low extremities on March, 23rd 2022 in a battlefield area 30 km away from Kyiv city. CAT tourniquet was applied to stop the bleeding and the patient was transported to Level II by ambulance 40 min after the injury. The patient was diagnosed with a gunshot injury to the left superficial femoral artery (SFA) followed by primary surgical debridement and temporary arterial shunting at Level II hospital. Then the patient was evacuated to Level IV hospital, diagnosed with an injury to the right popliteal artery, and underwent vascular reconstruction.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

Arterial shunting is a well-known approach to prevent critical ischemia and limb amputations of injured extremities in both combat and civilian patients. This case report provides evidence for the utility of temporary arterial shunting in combat conditions, which is supported by data from the larger cohorts. We consider temporary vascular shunting as a damage control measure to be associated with high chances of limb salvage in ongoing warfare.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated the utility of temporary arterial shunting in combat patients with gunshot wounds in ongoing warfare, which could be performed even in case of limited medical resources.

Impact of Ischemia Duration on Lower Limb Salvage in Combat Casualties

INTRODUCTION

The 6-hour threshold to revascularization of an ischemic limb is ubiquitous in the trauma literature, however, contemporary evidence suggests that this threshold should be less. This study aims to characterize the relationship between the duration of limb ischemia and successful limb salvage following lower extremity arterial trauma.

METHODS

This is a cohort study of the United States and UK military service members injured while serving in Iraq or Afghanistan between 2003 and 2013. Consecutive patients who sustained iliac, femoral, or popliteal artery injuries, and underwent surgery to attempt revascularization, were included. The association between limb outcome and the duration of limb ischemia was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-two patients (129 limbs) who sustained iliac (2.3%), femoral (56.6%), and popliteal (41.1%) arterial injuries were included. Overall, 87 limbs (67.4%) were successfully salvaged. The probability of limb salvage was 86.0% when ischemia was ≤1 hour; 68.3% when between 1 and 3 hours; 56.3% when between 3 and 6 hours; and 6.7% when >6 hours ( P <0.0001). Shock more than doubled the risk of failed limb salvage [hazard ratio=2.42 (95% confidence interval: 1.27-4.62)].

CONCLUSIONS

Limb salvage is critically dependent on the duration of ischemia with a 10% reduction in the probability of successful limb salvage for every hour delay to revascularization. The presence of shock significantly worsens this relationship. Military trauma systems should prioritize rapid hemorrhage control and early limb revascularization within 1 hour of injury.

Patency of arterial repairs from wartime extremity vascular injuries

BACKGROUND

Extremity vascular injury (EVI) causes significant disability in Veterans of the Afghanistan/Iraq conflicts. Advancements in acute trauma care improved survival and decreased amputations. The study of wartime EVI has relied on successful limb salvage as a surrogate for vascular repair. We used imaging studies as a specific measure of arterial repair durability.

METHODS

Service members with EVI were identified using the Department of Defense Trauma Registry and validated by chart abstraction. Inclusion criteria for the arterial patency subgroup included an initial repair attempt with subsequent imaging reports (duplex ultrasound, CT angiography, and angiogram) documenting initial patency.

RESULTS

The cohort of 527 included 140 Veterans with available imaging studies for 143 arterial repairs; median follow-up from injury time to last available imaging study was 19 months (Q1-Q3: 3-58; range: 1-175). Injury mechanism was predominantly explosions (52%) and gunshot wounds (42%). Of the 143 arterial repairs, 81% were vein grafts. Eight repairs were occluded, replaced or included in extremity amputations. One upper extremity and three transtibial late amputations were performed for chronic pain and poor function averaging 27 months (SD: 4; range: 24-32). Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated patency rates of 99%, 97%, 95%, 91% and 91% at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively, with similar results for upper and lower extremity repairs. Explosive and gunshot wound injury mechanisms had similar patency rates and upper extremity injuries repaired with vein grafts had increased patency.

CONCLUSIONS

Arterial repair mid-term patency in combat-related extremity injuries is excellent based on imaging studies for 143 repairs. Assertive attempts at acute limb salvage and vascular repair are justified with decisions for amputation versus limb salvage based on the overall condition of the patient and degree of concomitant nerve, orthopedic and soft tissue injuries rather than the presence of arterial injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management, level IV.

Temporary intravascular shunt use improves early limb salvage after extremity vascular injury

OBJECTIVE

The use of temporary intravascular shunts (TIVSs) allow for restoration of distal perfusion and reduce ischemic time in the setting of arterial injury. As a damage control method, adjunct shunts restore perfusion during treatment of life-threatening injuries, or when patients require evacuation to a higher level of care. Single-center reports and case series have demonstrate that TIVS use can extend the opportunity for limb salvage. However, few multi-institutional studies on the topic have been reported. The objective of the present study was to characterize TIVS use through a multi-institutional registry and define its effects on early limb salvage.

METHODS

Data from the Prospective Observation Vascular Injury Treatment registry was analyzed. Civilian patients aged ≥18 years who had sustained an extremity vascular injury from September 2012 to November 2018 were included. Patients who had a TIVS used in the management of vascular injury were included in the TIVS group and those who had received treatment without a TIVS served as the control group. An unadjusted comparison of the groups was conducted to evaluate the differences in the baseline and outcome characteristics. Double robust estimation combining logistic regression with propensity score matching was used to evaluate the effect of TIVS usage on the primary end point of limb salvage.

RESULTS

TIVS use was identified in 78 patients from 24 trauma centers. The control group included 613 patients. Unmatched analysis demonstrated that the TIVS group was more severely injured (mean ± standard deviation injury severity score, 18.83 ± 11.76 for TIVS vs 14.93 ± 10.46 for control; P = .002) and had more severely mangled extremities (mean ± standard deviation abbreviated injury scale, extremity, score 3.23 ± 0.80 for TIVS vs 2.95 ± 0.87 for control; P = .008). Logistic regression demonstrated that propensity-matched control patients had a three times greater likelihood of amputation compared with the TIVS patients (odds ratio, 3.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-11.1; P = .026). Concomitant nerve injury and orthopedic fracture were associated with a greater risk of amputation. The median follow-up for the TIVS group was 12 days (interquartile range, 4-25 days) compared with 9 days (interquartile range, 4-18 days) for the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first multicenter, matched-cohort study to characterize early limb salvage as a function of TIVS use in the setting of extremity vascular injury. Shunts expedite limb perfusion and resulted in lower rates of amputation during the early phase of care. The use of TIVS should be one part of a more aggressive approach to restore perfusion in the most injured patients and ischemic limbs.

Tissue Engineered Axon Tracts Serve as Living Scaffolds to Accelerate Axonal Regeneration and Functional Recovery Following Peripheral Nerve Injury in Rats

Strategies to accelerate the rate of axon regeneration would improve functional recovery following peripheral nerve injury, in particular for cases involving segmental nerve defects. We are advancing tissue engineered nerve grafts (TENGs) comprised of long, aligned, centimeter-scale axon tracts developed by the controlled process of axon "stretch-growth" in custom mechanobioreactors. The current study used a rat sciatic nerve model to investigate the mechanisms of axon regeneration across nerve gaps bridged by TENGs as well as the extent of functional recovery compared to nerve guidance tubes (NGT) or autografts. We established that host axon growth occurred directly along TENG axons, which mimicked the action of "pioneer" axons during development by providing directed cues for accelerated outgrowth. Indeed, axon regeneration rates across TENGs were 3-4 fold faster than NGTs and equivalent to autografts. The infiltration of host Schwann cells - traditional drivers of peripheral axon regeneration - was also accelerated and progressed directly along TENG axons. Moreover, TENG repairs resulted in functional recovery levels equivalent to autografts, with both several-fold superior to NGTs. These findings demonstrate that engineered axon tracts serve as "living scaffolds" to guide host axon outgrowth by a new mechanism - which we term "axon-facilitated axon regeneration" - that leads to enhanced functional recovery.

Cellular Therapies in Trauma and Critical Care Medicine: Forging New Frontiers

Trauma is a leading cause of death in both military and civilian populations worldwide. Although medical advances have improved the overall morbidity and mortality often associated with trauma, additional research and innovative advancements in therapeutic interventions are needed to optimize patient outcomes. Cell-based therapies present a novel opportunity to improve trauma and critical care at both the acute and chronic phases that often follow injury. Although this field is still in its infancy, animal and human studies suggest that stem cells may hold great promise for the treatment of brain and spinal cord injuries, organ injuries, and extremity injuries such as those caused by orthopedic trauma, burns, and critical limb ischemia. However, barriers in the translation of cell therapies that include regulatory obstacles, challenges in manufacturing and clinical trial design, and a lack of funding are critical areas in need of development. In 2015, the Department of Defense Combat Casualty Care Research Program held a joint military–civilian meeting as part of its effort to inform the research community about this field and allow for effective planning and programmatic decisions regarding research and development. The objective of this article is to provide a “state of the science” review regarding cellular therapies in trauma and critical care, and to provide a foundation from which the potential of this emerging field can be harnessed to mitigate outcomes in critically ill trauma patients.

VA Vascular Injury Study (VAVIS): VA-DoD extremity injury outcomes collaboration

BACKGROUND

Limb injuries comprise 50-60% of U.S. Service member's casualties of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Combat-related vascular injuries are present in 12% of this cohort, a rate 5 times higher than in prior wars. Improvements in medical and surgical trauma care, including initial in-theatre limb salvage approaches (IILS) have resulted in improved survival and fewer amputations, however, the long-term outcomes such as morbidity, functional decline, and risk for late amputation of salvaged limbs using current process of care have not been studied. The long-term care of these injured warfighters poses a significant challenge to the Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

METHODS/DESIGN

The VA Vascular Injury Study (VAVIS): VA-DoD Extremity Injury Outcomes Collaborative, funded by the VA, Health Services Research and Development Service, is a longitudinal cohort study of Veterans with vascular extremity injuries. Enrollment will begin April, 2015 and continue for 3 years. Individuals with a validated extremity vascular injury in the Department of Defense Trauma Registry will be contacted and will complete a set of validated demographic, social, behavioral, and functional status measures during interview and online/ mailed survey. Primary outcome measures will: 1) Compare injury, demographic and geospatial characteristics of patients with IILS and identify late vascular surgery related limb complications and health care utilization in Veterans receiving VA vs. non-VA care, 2) Characterize the preventive services received by individuals with vascular repair and related outcomes, and 3) Describe patient-reported functional outcomes in Veterans with traumatic vascular limb injuries.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide key information about the current process of care for Active Duty Service members and Veterans with polytrauma/vascular injuries at risk for persistent morbidity and late amputation. The results of this study will be the first step for clinicians in VA and military settings to generate evidence-based treatment and care approaches to these injuries. It will identify areas where rehabilitation medicine and vascular specialty care or telehealth options are needed to allow for better planning, resource utilization, and improved DoD-to-VA care transitions.

Validation of the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment in patients with battlefield-related extremity vascular injuries

OBJECTIVE

Vascular extremity injuries can be a significant burden on a patient's long-term quality of life. Currently, no limb-specific surveys have been used to quantify the relation between injury pattern and the resultant physical or psychological impact. The objective of this study was to validate the use of the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) in the setting of extremity vascular injury.

METHODS

The Joint Theater Trauma Registry was queried and filtered for U.S. troops with an extremity vascular injury isolated to a single limb. Injury and management data were obtained, and the SMFA was administered after patient contact and consent. Validity was analyzed by characterization of SMFA score distribution, correlation with 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores, and assessment of its discriminative capability to external measures of injury severity (ie, Injury Severity Score [ISS], Mangled Extremity Severity Score [MESS], and Medicare Part A disability qualification).

RESULTS

At mean follow-up of 5 years, 164 patients (median age, 25 years; interquartile range, 22-31 years) completed both surveys. The overall SMFA Dysfunction Index was 24.8 ± 15.2 (range, 0-78; skewness, 0.60; floor/ceiling effect, 0%-1.2%; and nonresponse, 0%), and the overall Bother Index was 29.4 ± 20.2 (range, 0-96; skewness, 0.58; floor/ceiling effect, 0%-4.3%; and nonresponse, 0.6%). SF-36 physical component summary scores correlated inversely with the Dysfunction Index (r = -0.64; P < .01), whereas mental component summary scores correlated inversely with the Bother Index (r = -0.59; P < .01). No difference was found in reported scores between those considered severely injured (ISS > 15) and those not severely injured (ISS ≤ 15). However, those with mangled extremities (MESS ≥ 7) reported higher Dysfunction and Bother indices than those with lower scores (P < .05). In addition, patients considered disabled (per Medicare Part A qualifications) reported higher Dysfunction and Bother indices compared with those not considered disabled (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of the SMFA is validated in those with extremity vascular injuries, and it should be considered an adjunctive tool in evaluating long-term patient outcomes.