The sequential trauma score - a new instrument for the sequential mortality prediction in major trauma

Settlement Is at the End-Common Trauma Scores Require a Critical Reassessment Due to the Possible Dynamics of Traumatic Brain Injuries in Patients' Clinical Course

Background: Scientific studies on severely injured patients commonly utilize the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) and the Injury Severity Score (ISS) for injury assessment and to characterize trauma cohorts. However, due to potential deterioration (e.g., in the case of an increasing hemorrhage) during the clinical course, the assessment of injury severity in traumatic brain injury (TBI) can be challenging. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate whether and to what extent the worsening of TBI affects the AIS and ISS. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 80 polytrauma patients admitted to the trauma room of our level I trauma center with computed-tomography-confirmed TBI. The initial AIS, ISS, and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) values were reevaluated after follow-up imaging. Results: A total of 37.5% of the patients showed a significant increase in AIShead (3.7 vs. 4.1; p = 0.002) and the ISS (22.9 vs. 26.7, p = 0.0497). These changes resulted in an eight percent reduction in their TRISS-predicted survival probability (74.82% vs. 66.25%, p = 0.1835). Conclusions: The dynamic nature of intracranial hemorrhage complicates accurate injury severity assessment using the AIS and ISS, necessitating consideration in clinical studies and registries to prevent systematic bias in patient selection and subsequent data analysis.

Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting in-hospital mortality of patients with cervical spine fractures without spinal cord injury

BACKGROUND

The incidence of cervical spine fractures is increasing every day, causing a huge burden on society. This study aimed to develop and verify a nomogram to predict the in-hospital mortality of patients with cervical spine fractures without spinal cord injury. This could help clinicians understand the clinical outcome of such patients at an early stage and make appropriate decisions to improve their prognosis.

METHODS

This study included 394 patients with cervical spine fractures from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III database, and 40 clinical indicators of each patient on the first day of admission to the intensive care unit were collected. The independent risk factors were screened using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator regression analysis method, a multi-factor logistic regression model was established, nomograms were developed, and internal validation was performed. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn, and the area under the ROC curve (AUC), net reclassification improvement (NRI), and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) were calculated to evaluate the discrimination of the model. Moreover, the consistency between the actual probability and predicted probability was reflected using the calibration curve and Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) test. A decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed, and the nomogram was compared with the scoring system commonly used in clinical practice to evaluate the clinical net benefit.

RESULTS

The nomogram indicators included the systolic blood pressure, oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, bicarbonate, and simplified acute physiology score (SAPS) II. The results showed that our model had satisfactory predictive ability, with an AUC of 0.907 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.853-0.961) and 0.856 (95% CI = 0.746-0.967) in the training set and validation set, respectively. Compared with the SAPS-II system, the NRI values of the training and validation sets of our model were 0.543 (95% CI = 0.147-0.940) and 0.784 (95% CI = 0.282-1.286), respectively. The IDI values of the training and validation sets were 0.064 (95% CI = 0.004-0.123; P = 0.037) and 0.103 (95% CI = 0.002-0.203; P = 0.046), respectively. The calibration plot and HL test results confirmed that our model prediction results showed good agreement with the actual results, where the HL test values of the training and validation sets were P = 0.8 and P = 0.95, respectively. The DCA curve revealed that our model had better clinical net benefit than the SAPS-II system.

CONCLUSION

We explored the in-hospital mortality of patients with cervical spine fractures without spinal cord injury and constructed a nomogram to predict their prognosis. This could help doctors assess the patient's status and implement interventions to improve prognosis accordingly.

Admission S100B fails as neuro-marker but is a good predictor for intrahospital mortality in major trauma patients

BACKGROUND

S100 B is an extensively studied neuro-trauma marker, but its specificity and subsequently interpretation in major trauma patients might be limited, since extracerebral injuries are known to increase serum levels. Thus, we evaluated the potential role of S100B in the assessment of severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) in multiple injured patients upon emergency room (ER) admission and the first days of intensive care unit (ICU) stay.

METHODS

Retrospective study employing trauma registry data derived from a level 1 trauma center. Four cohorts of patients were grouped: isolated TBI (iTBI), polytrauma patients with TBI (PT + TBI), polytrauma patients without TBI (PT-TBI) and patients without polytrauma or TBI (control). S100B-serum levels were assessed immediately after admission in the emergency room and during the subsequent ICU stay. Values were correlated with injury severity score (ISS), Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

780 predominantly male patients (76 %) with a median age of 48 (30-63) and a median ISS of 24 (17-30) were enrolled in the study. Admission S100B correlated with ISS and TBI severity defined by the GCS (both p < 0.0001) but not with head abbreviated injury score (AIS) (p = 0.38). Compared with survivors, non-survivors had significantly higher median S100B levels in the ER (6.14 μg/L vs. 2.06 μg/L; p < 0.0001) and at ICU-day 1 (0.69 μg/L vs. 0.17 μg/L; p < 0.0001). S100B in the ER predicted mortality with an area under curve (AUC) of 0.77 (95 % CI 0,70-0,83, p < 0.0001), vs. 0.86 at ICU-day 1 (95 % CI 0,80-0,91, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, S100B is a valid biomarker for prediction of mortality in major trauma patients with a higher accuracy when assessed at the first day of ICU stay vs. immediately after ER admission. Since S100B did not correlate with pathologic TBI findings in multiple injured patients, it failed as predictive neuro-marker because extracerebral injuries demonstrated a higher influence on admission levels than neurotrauma. Although S100B levels are indicative for injury severity they should be interpreted with caution in polytrauma patients.

Comparison the Ability of Quantitative Trauma Severity Assessment Methods Based On GAP, RTS, and ISS Criteria in Determining the Prognosis of Accidental Patients

Objective

To compare the ability of quantitative trauma severity assessment methods based on Glasgow coma scale, age, and arterial pressure (GAP), revised trauma score (RTS), and injury severity score (ISS) criteria in determining the prognosis of accidental patients.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was performed on random patients referred to Imam Khomeini Hospital in Urmia from March 20, 2020 to September 21, 2020. The data were obtained by using a checklist includes items such as age, sex, respiration rate, oxygen saturation level, pulse rate, primary blood pressure, initial Glascow coma scale (GCS), patient outcome and injury to different parts of body. After collecting the data, it was entered into SPSS 18 and analyzed with the descriptive and analytical statistics include an independent t-test and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curves.

Results

Out of 1930 studied patients, 365 (18.9%) were women and 1565 (81.1%) were men. The mean age of patients was 37.05±17.11 years and women were significantly older than men. The mortality rate was 4.8% and was significantly more in men compared to women. The mean blood pressure, GCS and oxygen saturation level were lower in deceased patients. The mean GAP, ISS and RTS values were 23.13±2.69, 4.07±3.82, 7.72±0.52, respectively. The mean values of GAP and RTS were significantly low in deceased patients whereas the mean ISS value was significantly high in the deceased patients. The Area under the curve (AUS) for ISS was greater than the other two scoring systems.

Conclusion

The findings of the current study showed that all three systems were adequately efficient to prognoses the final outcome in multi-trauma patients but the ISS measure was better than the other two criteria.

Beyond Mortality: Does Trauma-related Injury Severity Score Predict Complications or Lengths of Stay Using a Large Administrative Dataset

Introduction:

Despite its shortcomings, trauma-related injury severity score (TRISS) correlates well with mortality in large trauma datasets. The aim of this study was to determine if TRISS correlates with morbidity and hospital lengths of stay using data from an institutional registry at a Level I Trauma Center. We hypothesized that higher TRISS correlates with increased complications and longer hospital stays.

Methods:

A retrospective review of our institutional registry was performed, examining all trauma admissions between January 1999 and June 30, 2015. Out of a total of 32,026 patient records, TRISS data were available in 23,205 cases. Abstracted data included patient age, gender, ISS, TRISS, presence of complication, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), hospital length of stay, intensive care unit LOS, step-down unit LOS, functional independence measure, and 30-day mortality.

Results:

TRISS was highly predictive of mortality, with the AUC value of 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.936–0.954, P < 0.01) compared to ISS (AUC 0.794), GCS (AUC 0.827), and age (AUC 0.650). TRISS also performed better than the other variables in terms of the ability to predict morbidity events (AUC 0.813). TRISS was comparable to ISS in terms of prediction of ICU admission (AUC 0.801 versus 0.811, respectively). After correcting for patient age and gender, higher TRISS significantly correlated with longer hospital stays .

Conclusions:

Despite previous criticisms, we found that TRISS is superior to ISS for mortality and morbidity prediction. TRISS correlated significantly with a hospital, step down, and ICU lengths of stay using a large administrative dataset.

The AdHOC (age, head injury, oxygenation, circulation) score: a simple assessment tool for early assessment of severely injured patients with major fractures

Purpose

We sought to develop a simple, effective and accurate assessment tool using well-known prognostic parameters to predict mortality and morbidity in severely injured patients with major fractures at the stage of the trauma bay.

Methods

European Data from the TraumaRegister DGU^® were queried for patients aged 16 or older and with an ISS of 9 and higher with major fractures. The development (2012–2015) and validation (2016) groups were separated. The four prognostic aspects Age, Head injury, Oxygenation and Circulation along with parameters were identified as having a relevant impact on the outcome of severely injured patients with major fractures. The performance of the score was analyzed with the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve and compared to other trauma scores.

Results

An increasing AdHOC (Age, Head injury, Oxygenation, Circulation) score value in the 17,827 included patients correlated with increasing mortality (0 points = 0.3%, 1 point = 5.3%, 2 points = 15.6%, 3 points = 42.5% and 4 points = 62.6%). With an AUROC of 0.858 for the development (n = 14,047) and 0.877 for the validation (n = 3780) group dataset, the score is superior in performance compared to the Injury Severity Score (0.806/0.815).

Conclusion

The AdHOC score appears to be easy and accessible in every emergency room without the requirement of special diagnostic tools or knowledge of the exact injury pattern and can be useful for the planning of further surgical treatment.

The ratio of shock index to pulse oxygen saturation predicting mortality of emergency trauma patients

OBJECTIVE

To test the following hypothesis: the ratio of shock index to pulse oxygen saturation can better predict the mortality of emergency trauma patients than shock index.

METHODS

1723 Patients of trauma admitted to the Emergency Department of the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from 1 November 2016 to 30 November 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. We defined SS as the ratio of SI to SPO2, and the mortality of trauma patients in the emergency department as end-point of outcome. We calculated the crude HR of SS and adjusted HR with the adjustment for risk factors including sex, age, revised trauma score (RTS) by Cox regression model. ROC curve analyses were performed to compare the area under the curve (AUC) of SS and SI.

RESULTS

The crude HR of SS was: 4.31, 95%CI (2.89-6.42) and adjusted HR: 3.01, 95%CI(1.86-4.88); ROC curve analyses showed that AUC of SS was higher than that of shock index (SI), and the difference was statistically significant: 0.69, 95%CI(0.55-0.83) vs 0.65, 95%CI (0.51-0.79), P = 0.001.

CONCLUSION

The ratio of shock index to pulse oxygen saturation is good predictor for emergency trauma patients, which has a better prognostic value than shock index.

Inclusion of lactate level measured upon emergency room arrival in trauma outcome prediction models improves mortality prediction: a retrospective, single-center study

Background

This study aimed to develop a model for predicting trauma outcomes by adding arterial lactate levels measured upon emergency room (ER) arrival to existing trauma injury severity scoring systems.

Methods

We examined blunt trauma cases that were admitted to our hospital during 2010– 2014. Eligibility criteria were cases with an Injury Severity Score of ≥9, complete Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) variable data, and lactate levels that were assessed upon ER arrival. Survivor and non-survivor groups were compared and lactate-based prediction models were generated using logistic regression. We compared the predictive performances of traditional prediction models (Revised Trauma Score [RTS] and TRISS) and lactate-based models using the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curves.

Results

We included 829 patients, and the in-hospital mortality rate among these patients was 21.6%. The model that used lactate levels and age provided a significantly better AUC value than the RTS model. The model with lactate added to the TRISS variables provided the highest Youden J statistic, with 86.0% sensitivity and 70.8% specificity at a cutoff value of 0.15, as well as the highest predictive value, with a significantly higher AUC than the TRISS.

Conclusions

These findings indicate that lactate testing upon ER arrival may help supplement or replace traditional physiological parameters to predict mortality outcomes among Korean trauma patients. Adding lactate levels also appears to improve the predictive abilities of existing trauma outcome prediction models.

Feasibility of continuous noninvasive arterial pressure monitoring in a prehospital setting, measurements during emergency transfer

In severely injured or acutely ill patients close monitoring of blood pressure (BP) can be crucial. At the prehospital scene and during transfer to hospital, the BP is usually monitored using intermittent oscillometric measurements with an upper arm cuff every 3–5 min. The BP can be monitored noninvasively and continuously using the continuous noninvasive arterial pressure (CNAP) device. In this study, we investigated the feasibility of a CNAP device in a prehospital setting.

Machine Learning Models of Survival Prediction in Trauma Patients

BACKGROUND

We aimed to build a model using machine learning for the prediction of survival in trauma patients and compared these model predictions to those predicted by the most commonly used algorithm, the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS).

METHODS

Enrolled hospitalized trauma patients from 2009 to 2016 were divided into a training dataset (70% of the original data set) for generation of a plausible model under supervised classification, and a test dataset (30% of the original data set) to test the performance of the model. The training and test datasets comprised 13,208 (12,871 survival and 337 mortality) and 5603 (5473 survival and 130 mortality) patients, respectively. With the provision of additional information such as pre-existing comorbidity status or laboratory data, logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), and neural network (NN) (with the Stuttgart Neural Network Simulator (RSNNS)) were used to build models of survival prediction and compared to the predictive performance of TRISS. Predictive performance was evaluated by accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, as well as by area under the curve (AUC) measures of receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

In the validation dataset, NN and the TRISS presented the highest score (82.0%) for balanced accuracy, followed by SVM (75.2%) and LR (71.8%) models. In the test dataset, NN had the highest balanced accuracy (75.1%), followed by the TRISS (70.2%), SVM (70.6%), and LR (68.9%) models. All four models (LR, SVM, NN, and TRISS) exhibited a high accuracy of more than 97.5% and a sensitivity of more than 98.6%. However, NN exhibited the highest specificity (51.5%), followed by the TRISS (41.5%), SVM (40.8%), and LR (38.5%) models.

CONCLUSIONS

These four models (LR, SVM, NN, and TRISS) exhibited a similar high accuracy and sensitivity in predicting the survival of the trauma patients. In the test dataset, the NN model had the highest balanced accuracy and predictive specificity.

Performance of injury severity measures in trauma research: a literature review and validation analysis of studies from low-income and middle-income countries

INTRODUCTION

Characterisation of injury severity is an important pillar of scientific research to measure and compare the outcomes. Although majority of injury severity measures were developed in high-income countries, many have been studied in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We conducted this study to identify and characterise all injury severity measures, describe how widely and frequently they are used in trauma research from LMICs, and summarise the evidence on their performance based on empirical and theoretical validation​ analysis.

METHODS

First, a list of injury measures was identified through PubMed search. Subsequently, a systematic search of PubMed, Global Health and EMBASE was undertaken on LMIC trauma literature published from January 2006 to June 2016, in order to assess the application and performance of injury severity measures to predict in-hospital mortality. Studies that applied one or more global injury severity measure(s) on all types of injuries were included, with the exception of war injuries and isolated organ injuries.

RESULTS

Over a span of 40 years, more than 55 injury severity measures were developed. Out of 3862 non-duplicate citations, 597 studies from 54 LMICs were listed as eligible studies. Full-text review revealed 37 studies describing performance of injury severity measures for outcome prediction. Twenty-five articles from 13 LMICs assessed the validity of at least one injury severity measure for in-hospital mortality. Injury severity score was the most commonly validated measure in LMICs, with a wide range of performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) between 0.9 and 0.65). Trauma and Injury Severity Score validation studies reported AUROC between 0.80 and 0.98.

CONCLUSION

Empirical studies from LMICs frequently use injury severity measures, however, no single injury severity measure has shown a consistent result in all settings or populations and thus warrants validation studies for the diversity of LMIC population.

[Prehospital assessment of injury type and severity in severely injured patients by emergency physicians : An analysis of the TraumaRegister DGU®]

BACKGROUND

Prehospital assessment of injury type and severity by emergency medical services physicians impacts treatment including appropriate destination hospital selection, especially in (potentially) life-threatening cases. Injuries which are underestimated or overlooked by the emergency physician can delay adequate therapy and thus significantly influence the overall outcome. The current study used data from the TraumaRegister DGU® to evaluate the reliability of prehospital injury assessments made by emergency physicians.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data of 30,777 patients from the TraumaRegister DGU® between 1993 and 2009 were retrospectively evaluated. Using the abbreviated injury scale (AIS), subjective prehospital assessments of injury severity by emergency physicians were correlated with objectively identified injuries diagnosed after admission to hospital. For this evaluation, prehospital injury assessments rated moderate or severe by the emergency physician as well as injuries diagnosed in hospital with an AIS score ≥3 points were deemed relevant.

RESULTS

The 30,777 patients with an injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 9 suffered a total of 202,496 injuries and of these 26 % (51,839 out of 202,496) were considered relevant with an AIS ≥3 points. The most frequent relevant injuries were to the head (47 %) and chest (46 %). Of the 51,839 relevant injuries, the prehospital assessment by the emergency physician was accurate for 71 % and in 29 % of the cases relevant injuries were underestimated. Relevant injuries were unrecognized or underestimated in prehospital assessments for almost 1 out of every 7 cases of head trauma, almost 1 out of every 3 thoracic trauma and almost 1 out of every 2 abdominal and pelvic trauma.

CONCLUSION

The assessment of injury severity by emergency medical services physicians based on physical examination at the scene of the trauma is not very reliable. Thus, mechanisms of injury and overall presentation as well as identifiable injuries and vital parameters should be recognized by the emergency physician when considering treatment strategies and choice of appropriate destination hospital. The patient should be re-evaluated in a priority-oriented manner at the latest on arrival in the trauma room to avoid the consequences of unrecognized or underestimated injuries.

Do clinical guidelines for whole body computerised tomography in trauma improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce unnecessary investigations? A systematic review and narrative synthesis

Introduction

Whole body computerised tomography has become a standard of care for the investigation of major trauma patients. However, its use varies widely, and current clinical guidelines are not universally accepted. We undertook a systematic review of the literature to determine whether clinical guidelines for whole body computerised tomography in trauma increase its diagnostic accuracy.

Materials and methods

A systematic review of Medline, Cinhal and the Cochrane database, supplemented by a manual search of relevant papers was undertaken, with narrative synthesis. Studies comparing clinical guidelines to physician gestalt for the use of whole body computerised tomography in adult trauma were included.

Results

A total of 887 papers were identified from the electronic databases, and 1 from manual searches. Of these, seven papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Two papers compared clinical guidelines with routine practice: one found increased diagnostic accuracy while the other did not. Two papers investigated the performance of established clinical guidelines and demonstrated moderate sensitivity and low specificity. Two papers compared different components of established triage tools in trauma. One paper devised a de novo clinical decision rule, and demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy with the tool. The outcome criteria used to define a ‘positive’ scan varied widely, making direct comparisons between studies impossible.

Conclusions

Current clinical guidelines for whole body computerised tomography in trauma may increase the sensitivity of the investigation, but the evidence to support this is limited. There is a need to standardise the definition of a ‘clinically significant’ finding on CT to allow better comparison of diagnostic studies.

[Care for severely injured persons : Update of the 2016 S3 guideline for the treatment of polytrauma and the severely injured]

In 2011 the first interdisciplinary S3 guideline for the management of patients with serious injuries/trauma was published. After intensive revision and in consensus with 20 different medical societies, the updated version of the guideline was published online in September 2016. It is divided into three sections: prehospital care, emergency room management and the first operative phase. Many recommendations and explanations were updated, mostly in the prehospital care and emergency room management sections. These two sections are of special interest for anesthesiologists in field emergency physician roles or as team members or team leaders in the emergency room. The present work summarizes the changes to the current guideline and gives a brief overview of this very important work.

Clinical Significance of Fibrinogen Degradation Product Among Traumatized Patients

OBJECTIVE

We retrospectively analyzed trauma patients who were transported by a physician-staffed helicopter (doctor helicopter) to investigate the clinical significance of the fibrinogen degradation product (FDP) level on arrival.

METHODS

From February 2011 to July 2016, a medical chart review was retrospectively performed for all patients with trauma who were transported by the doctor helicopter. The subjects were divided into 2 groups: a survival group and a fatal group.

RESULTS

There were 135 patients in the survival group and 16 in the fatal group. The ratio of head injury, value of Injury Severity Score (ISS), and level of FDP in the fatal group were significantly greater than in the survival group. The average Glasgow Coma Scale and systolic blood pressure in the fatal group were significantly smaller than in the survival group. The FDP level at arrival was positively associated with the ISS (R = 0.74, P < .0001). After excluding subjects with shock, unconsciousness, and head injury, the FDP level was still positively associated with the ISS (R = 0.60, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Therefore, the FDP level may be a useful biochemical parameter for the initial evaluation of the severity of trauma, even in blunt trauma patients without head injury or with stable vital signs.

Mortality prediction models in the general trauma population: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Trauma is the leading cause of death in individuals younger than 40 years. There are many different models for predicting patient outcome following trauma. To our knowledge, no comprehensive review has been performed on prognostic models for the general trauma population. Therefore, this review aimed to describe (1) existing mortality prediction models for the general trauma population, (2) the methodological quality and (3) which variables are most relevant for the model prediction of mortality in the general trauma population.

METHODS

An online search was conducted in June 2015 using Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cinahl, Cochrane, Google Scholar and PubMed. Relevant English peer-reviewed articles that developed, validated or updated mortality prediction models in a general trauma population were included.

RESULTS

A total of 90 articles were included. The cohort sizes ranged from 100 to 1,115,389 patients, with overall mortality rates that ranged from 0.6% to 35%. The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) was the most commonly used model. A total of 258 models were described in the articles, of which only 103 models (40%) were externally validated. Cases with missing values were often excluded and discrimination of the different prediction models ranged widely (AUROC between 0.59 and 0.98). The predictors were often included as dichotomized or categorical variables, while continuous variables showed better performance.

CONCLUSION

Researchers are still searching for a better mortality prediction model in the general trauma population. Models should 1) be developed and/or validated using an adequate sample size with sufficient events per predictor variable, 2) use multiple imputation models to address missing values, 3) use the continuous variant of the predictor if available and 4) incorporate all different types of readily available predictors (i.e., physiological variables, anatomical variables, injury cause/mechanism, and demographic variables). Furthermore, while mortality rates are decreasing, it is important to develop models that predict physical, cognitive status, or quality of life to measure quality of care.

Radiological findings and radiation exposure during trauma workup in a cohort of 1124 level 1 trauma patients

BACKGROUND

During the initial assessment of patients with potential severe injuries, radiological examinations are performed in order to rapidly diagnose clinically relevant injuries. Previous studies have shown that performing these examinations routinely is not always necessary and that trauma patients are exposed to substantial radiation doses. The aim of this study was to assess the amount and findings of radiological examinations during the initial assessment of trauma patients and to determine the radiation doses to which these patients are exposed to.

METHODS

We analyzed the 1124 patients included in a randomized trial. All radiological examinations during the initial assessment (i.e., primary and secondary survey) were assessed. The examination results were categorized as positive findings (i.e., (suspicion for) traumatic injury) and normal findings. The effective radiation doses for the examinations were calculated separately for each patient.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and three patients were male (71 %), median age was 38 years, and 1079 patients sustained blunt trauma (96 %). During initial assessment, almost 3900 X-rays were performed, of which 25.4 % showed positive findings. FAST of the abdomen was performed in 989 patients (88 %), with positive findings in 10.6 %. Additional CT scanning of specific body regions was performed 1890 times in 813 patients (72.1 %), of which approximately 43.4 % revealed positive findings. Hemodynamically stable patients showed more normal findings on the radiographic studies than unstable patients. The mean radiation doses for the total population was 8.46 mSv (±7.7) and for polytraumatized patients (ISS ≥ 16) 14.3 mSv (±9.5).

CONCLUSION

Radiological diagnostics during initial assessment of trauma patients show a high rate of normal findings in our trauma system. The radiation doses to which trauma patients are exposed are considerable. Considering that the majority of the injured patients are hemodynamically stable, we suggest more selective use of X-ray and CT scanning.

Benefits of Initial Limited Crystalloid Resuscitation in Severely Injured Trauma Patients at Emergency Department

Background

Whether initial limited crystalloid resuscitation (LCR) benefits to all severely injured trauma patients receiving blood transfusions at emergency department (ED) is uncertain. We aimed to determine the role of LCR and its associations with packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion during initial resuscitation.

Methods

Trauma patients receiving blood transfusions were reviewed from 2004 to 2013. Patients with LCR (L group, defined as < 2,000 mL) and excessive crystalloid resuscitation (E group, defined as ≥ 2,000 mL) were compared separately in terms of basic demographic, clinical variables, and hospital outcomes. Logistic regression, R-square (R²), and Spearman rho correlation were used for analysis.

Results

A total of 633 patients were included. The mortality was 51% in L group and 45% in E group (P = 0.11). No statistically significant difference was found in terms of basic demographics, vital signs upon arrival at ED, or injury severity between the groups. The volume of blood transfused strongly correlated with the volume of crystalloid infused in E group (R² = 0.955). Crystalloid to PRBC (C/PRBC) ratio was 0.8 in L group and 1.3 in E group (P < 0.01). The correlations between C/PRBC and ED versus ICU versus hospital length of stay (LOS) via Spearman rho were 0.25, 0.22, and 0.22, respectively.

Conclusions

Similar outcomes were observed in trauma patients receiving blood transfusions regardless of the crystalloid infusion volume. More crystalloid infusions were associated with more blood transfusions. The C/PRBC did not demonstrate predictive value regarding mortality but might predict LOS in severely injured trauma patients.

Patients with thoracic trauma and concomitant spinal cord injury have a markedly decreased mortality rate compared to patients without spinal cord injury

INTRODUCTION

The present study was performed to compare the clinical outcome, with special focus on the mortality rate of thoracic injuries, in patients with and without spinal cord injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who were treated for thoracic trauma at our institution between January 1998 and December 2007 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they had suffered a concomitant spinal cord injury (SCI) (N = 54) or not (N = 61). Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier function and the Cox proportional hazards model. Age, sex, injury severity score (ISS), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and infection with pneumonia were included as covariates in the final model.

RESULTS

Patients with SCI have a 65 % reduction in the chance of dying compared to patients without SCI following thoracic trauma (HR = 0.35; 95%CI = 0.13-0.96; p = 0.041). Sex (HR = 0.67; 95 % CI: 0.26-1.71, P = 0.141), ISS > =25 (HR = 2.08 95 % CI: 0.58-7.49, P = 2.63) and a Charlson Comorbidity Index of 2 (HR = 1.82; 95 % CI: 0.58-7.22, P = 0.393) had no effect in the risk of dying. However, patients older than 60 years had four times the chance of dying than patients younger than 30 years (HR = 4.39; 95 % CI: 1.02-19, P = 0.048). Patients with pneumonia had a nonsignificant twofold increase in the risk of dying (HR = 2.28; 95 % CI: 0.97-5.34, P = 0.059).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that patients with thoracic trauma and concomitant SCI had markedly decreased mortality compared to patients without SCI, even after adjusting for age, sex, injury severity, comorbidities and pneumonia infection.

The use of double lumen cannula for veno-venous ECMO in trauma patients with ARDS

Background

The use of a double lumen cannula for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (v.v. ECMO) offers several advantages such as cannulation with only one cannula, patient comfort and the earlier mobilization and physiotherapy. The cannulation should be performed under visual wire and cannula placement into the right atrium, which is associated with risks of malposition and right ventricular perforation. The aim of this patient series is to describe the use of double lumen cannula in trauma patients with posttraumatic ARDS.

Material and methods

Criteria for the v.v ECMO treatment were defined as hypoxaemia (pO2/FiO2 < 200 mmHg, FiO2 0.8-1,0); tidal volume >4-6 ml/kg ideal body weight; mean inspiratory pressure (Pinsp) >32-34 mmHg; respiratory acidosis pH <7.25; and arterial saturation (SaO2) <90%. The analysis included the Injury Severity Score (ISS), the types of injury, time of treatment, complications and outcomes.

Results

A total of 24 patients with major trauma were treated for posttraumatic ARDS with v.v. ECMO. The double lumen cannula (Avalon®, Fa. Maquet, Rastatt, Germany) was used in six male patients. The mean ISS was 31 (20–48). The ECMO therapy was started in an average on the third day after trauma. The mean ECMO run time was 7 days ± 5 (6–18), and the hospital stay was in mean of 60 days ± 34 (21–105).

Conclusion

The use of double lumen cannula for v.v ECMO therapy in trauma patients is a feasible treatment option. No higher risk of bleeding could be found in this case series. A PTT-controlled heparinization is recommended using double lumen cannula. Therefore the use of this cannula type in trauma patients with high risk of bleeding is to discuss controversially.

Validation and reclassification of MGAP and GAP in hospital settings using data from the Trauma Audit and Research Network

BACKGROUND

Recently, two simple clinical scores were published to predict survival in trauma patients. Both scores may successfully guide major trauma triage, but neither has been independently validated in a hospital setting.

METHODS

This is a cohort study with 30-day mortality as the primary outcome to validate two new trauma scores-Mechanism, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), Age, and Pressure (MGAP) score and GCS, Age and Pressure (GAP) score-using data from the UK Trauma Audit and Research Network. First, an assessment of discrimination, using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and calibration, comparing mortality rates with those originally published, were performed. Second, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios for prognostic score performance. Third, we propose new cutoffs for the risk categories.

RESULTS

A total of 79,807 adult (≥16 years) major trauma patients (2000-2010) were included; 5,474 (6.9%) died. Mean (SD) age was 51.5 (22.4) years, median GCS score was 15 (interquartile range, 15-15), and median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 9 (interquartile range, 9-16). More than 50% of the patients had a low-risk GAP or MGAP score (1% mortality). With regard to discrimination, areas under the ROC curve were 87.2% for GAP score (95% confidence interval, 86.7-87.7) and 86.8% for MGAP score (95% confidence interval, 86.2-87.3). With regard to calibration, 2,390 (3.3%), 1,900 (28.5%), and 1,184 (72.2%) patients died in the low, medium, and high GAP risk categories, respectively. In the low- and medium-risk groups, these were almost double the previously published rates. For MGAP, 1,861 (2.8%), 1,455 (15.2%), and 2,158 (58.6%) patients died in the low-, medium-, and high-risk categories, consonant with results originally published. Reclassifying score point cutoffs improved likelihood ratios, sensitivity and specificity, as well as areas under the ROC curve.

CONCLUSION

We found both scores to be valid triage tools to stratify emergency department patients, according to their risk of death. MGAP calibrated better, but GAP slightly improved discrimination. The newly proposed cutoffs better differentiate risk classification and may therefore facilitate hospital resource allocation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, level II.

Risk stratification in trauma and haemorrhagic shock: scoring systems derived from the TraumaRegister DGU(®)

Scoring systems commonly attempt to reduce complex clinical situations into one-dimensional values by objectively valuing and combining a variety of clinical aspects. The aim is to allow for a comparison of selected patients or cohorts. To appreciate the true value of scoring systems in patients with multiple injuries it is necessary to understand the different purposes of quantifying the severity of specific injuries and overall trauma load, being: (1) clinical decision making; (2) triage; (3) planning of trauma systems and resources; (4) epidemiological and clinical research; (5) evaluation of outcome and trauma systems, including quality assessment; and (6) estimation of costs and allocation of resources. For the first two, easy-to estimate scores with immediate availability are necessary, mainly based on initial physiology. More sophisticated scores considering age, gender, injury pattern/severity and more are usually used for research and outcome evaluation, once the diagnostic and therapeutic process has been completed. For score development large numbers of data are necessary and thus, it appears as a logical consequence that large registries as the TraumaRegister DGU(®) of the German Trauma Society (TR-DGU) are used to derive and validate clinical scoring systems. A variety of scoring systems have been derived from this registry, the majority of them with focus on hospital mortality. The most important among these systems is probably the RISC score, which is currently used for quality assessment and outcome adjustment in the annual audit reports. This report summarizes the various scoring systems derived from the TraumaRegister DGU(®) over the recent years.

Effect of the localisation of the CT scanner during trauma resuscitation on survival -- a retrospective, multicentre study

INTRODUCTION

Whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) is increasingly becoming the standard diagnostic technique during the resuscitation of severely injured patients. However, little is known about the ideal localisation of the CT scanner within the emergency setting. We intended to analyse the potential effect of the localisation of the CT scanner on outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a retrospective multicentre cohort study involving 8004 adult blunt major trauma patients out of 312 hospitals, we analysed the effect of the distance of the trauma room to the CT scanner on the outcome. Three groups were built: 1. CT in the trauma room 2. CT equal or less than 50 m away and 3. CT more than 50 m away. Using data derived from the 2007-2011 version of TraumaRegister DGU(®) and the structure data bank of the TraumaNetzwerk DGU(®) (trauma network, TNW; German Trauma Society, DGU) we determined the observed and predicted mortality and calculated the standardised mortality ratio (SMR) as well as logistic regressions.

RESULTS

n=8004 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria: their mean age was 46.4 ± 21.0 years. 72.8% of them were male and the mean injury severity score (ISS) was 28.6 ± 11.8. The overall mortality rate was 16.0%. The mean time from hospital admission to whole-body CT was 17.1 ± 12.3 min for group 1, 22.7 ± 15.5 min for group 2 and 27.7 ± 17.1 min for group 3, p<0.001. Risk adjusted SMR was 0.74 (CI 95% 0.67-0.81) in group 1, 0.81 (CI 95% 0.76-0.87) in group 2, and 0.88 (CI 95% 0.79-0.98) in group 3. SMR group 1 vs. SMR group 2: p=0.130. SMR group 2 vs. SMR group 3: p=0.170. SMR group 1 vs. SMR group 3: p=0.016. SMR groups 1+2 vs. SMR group 3: p=0.046. Comparable data were found for the subgroup analysis of Level-I trauma centres only. Logistic regression confirmed the positive effect of a close localisation of the CT to the trauma room. The odds ratio (OR) was lowest for the localisation of the CT in the trauma room (OR 0.68, CI 95% 0.54-0.86, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

It was proven for the first time that a close distance of the CT scanner to the trauma room has a significant positive effect on the probability of survival of severely injured patients. The closer the CT is located to the trauma room, the better the probability of survival. Distances of more than 50 m had a significant negative effect on the outcome. If new emergency departments are planned or rebuilt, the CT scanner should be placed less than 50 m away from or preferably in the trauma room.

Update of the trauma risk adjustment model of the TraumaRegister DGU™: the Revised Injury Severity Classification, version II

INTRODUCTION

The TraumaRegister DGU™ (TR-DGU) has used the Revised Injury Severity Classification (RISC) score for outcome adjustment since 2003. In recent years, however, the observed mortality rate has fallen to about 2% below the prognosis, and it was felt that further prognostic factors, like pupil size and reaction, should be included as well. Finally, an increasing number of cases did not receive a RISC prognosis due to the missing values. Therefore, there was a need for an updated model for risk of death prediction in severely injured patients to be developed and validated using the most recent data.

METHODS

The TR-DGU has been collecting data from severely injured patients since 1993. All injuries are coded according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS, version 2008). Severely injured patients from Europe (ISS ≥ 4) documented between 2010 and 2011 were selected for developing the new score (n = 30,866), and 21,918 patients from 2012 were used for validation. Age and injury codes were required, and transferred patients were excluded. Logistic regression analysis was applied with hospital mortality as the dependent variable. Results were evaluated in terms of discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, AUC), precision (observed versus predicted mortality), and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistic).

RESULTS

The mean age of the development population was 47.3 years; 71.6% were males, and the average ISS was 19.3 points. Hospital mortality rate was 11.5% in this group. The new RISC II model consists of the following predictors: worst and second-worst injury (AIS severity level), head injury, age, sex, pupil reactivity and size, pre-injury health status, blood pressure, acidosis (base deficit), coagulation, haemoglobin, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Missing values are included as a separate category for every variable. In the development and the validation dataset, the new RISC II outperformed the original RISC score, for example AUC in the development dataset 0.953 versus 0.939.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated RISC II prognostic score has several advantages over the previous RISC model. Discrimination, precision and calibration are improved, and patients with partial missing values could now be included. Results were confirmed in a validation dataset.

Whole-body CT in haemodynamically unstable severely injured patients--a retrospective, multicentre study

BACKGROUND

The current common and dogmatic opinion is that whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) should not be performed in major trauma patients in shock. We aimed to assess whether WBCT during trauma-room treatment has any effect on the mortality of severely injured patients in shock.

METHODS

In a retrospective multicenter cohort study involving 16719 adult blunt major trauma patients we compared the survival of patients who were in moderate, severe or no shock (systolic blood pressure 90-110,<90 or >110 mmHg) at hospital admission and who received WBCT during resuscitation to those who did not. Using data derived from the 2002-2009 version of TraumaRegister®, we determined the observed and predicted mortality and calculated the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) as well as logistic regressions.

FINDINGS

9233 (55.2%) of the 16719 patients received WBCT. The mean injury severity score was 28.8±12.1. The overall mortality rate was 17.4% (SMR  = 0.85, 95%CI 0.81-0.89) for patients with WBCT and 21.4% (SMR = 0.98, 95%CI 0.94-1.02) for those without WBCT (p<0.001). 4280 (25.6%) patients were in moderate shock and 1821 (10.9%) in severe shock. The mortality rate for patients in moderate shock with WBCT was 18.1% (SMR 0.85, CI95% 0.78-0.93) compared to 22.6% (SMR 1.03, CI95% 0.94-1.12) to those without WBCT (p<0.001, p = 0.002 for the SMRs). The mortality rate for patients in severe shock with WBCT was 42.1% (SMR 0.99, CI95% 0.92-1.06) compared to 54.9% (SMR 1.10, CI95% 1.02-1.16) to those without WBCT (p<0.001, p = 0.049 for the SMRs). Adjusted logistic regression analyses showed that WBCT is an independent predictor for survival that significantly increases the chance of survival in patients in moderate shock (OR = 0.73; 95%CI 0.60-0.90, p = 0.002) as well as in severe shock (OR = 0.67; 95%CI 0.52-0.88, p = 0.004). The number needed to scan related to survival was 35 for all patients, 26 for those in moderate shock and 20 for those in severe shock.

CONCLUSIONS

WBCT during trauma resuscitation significantly increased the survival in haemodynamically stable as well as in haemodynamically unstable major trauma patients. Thus, the application of WBCT in haemodynamically unstable severely injured patients seems to be safe, feasible and justified if performed quickly within a well-structured environment and by a well-organized trauma team.

Clinical and cellular effects of hypothermia, acidosis and coagulopathy in major injury

BACKGROUND

Hypothermia, acidosis and coagulopathy have long been considered critical combinations after severe injury. The aim of this review was to give a clinical update on this triad in severely injured patients.

METHODS

A non-systematic literature search on hypothermia, acidosis and coagulopathy after major injury was undertaken, with a focus on clinical data from the past 5 years.

RESULTS

Hypothermia (less than 35 °C) is reported in 1·6-13·3 per cent of injured patients. The occurrence of acidosis is difficult to estimate, but usually follows other physiological disturbances. Trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) has both endogenous and exogenous components. Endogenous acute traumatic coagulopathy is associated with shock and hypoperfusion. Exogenous effects of dilution from fluid resuscitation and consumption through bleeding and loss of coagulation factors further add to TIC. TIC is present in 10-34 per cent of injured patients, depending on injury severity, acidosis, hypothermia and hypoperfusion. More expedient detection of coagulopathy is needed. Thromboelastography may be a useful point-of-care measurement. Management of TIC is controversial, with conflicting reports on blood component therapy in terms of both outcome and ratios of blood products to other fluids, particularly in the context of civilian trauma.

CONCLUSION

The triad of hypothermia, acidosis and coagulopathy after severe trauma appears to be fairly rare but does carry a poor prognosis. Future research should define modes of early detection and targeted therapy.

Advances in prehospital trauma care

Prehospital trauma care developed over the last decades parallel in many countries. Most of the prehospital emergency medical systems relied on input or experiences from military medicine and were often modeled after the existing military procedures. Some systems were initially developed with the trauma patient in mind, while other systems were tailored for medical, especially cardiovascular, emergencies. The key components to successful prehospital trauma care are the well-known ABCs of trauma care: Airway, Breathing, Circulation. Establishing and securing the airway, ventilation, fluid resuscitation, and in addition, the quick transport to the best-suited trauma center represent the pillars of trauma care in the field. While ABC in trauma care has neither been challenged nor changed, new techniques, tools and procedures have been developed to make it easier for the prehospital provider to achieve these goals in the prehospital setting and thus improve the outcome of trauma patients.