David G. Jacobs

Blunt cerebrovascular injury practice management guidelines: the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

BACKGROUND Blunt injury to the carotid or vertebral vessels (blunt cerebrovascular injury [BCVI]) is diagnosed in approximately 1 of 1,000 (0.1%) patients hospitalized for trauma in the United States with the majority of these injuries diagnosed after the development of symptoms secondary to central nervous system ischemia, with a resultant neurologic morbidity of up to 80% and associated mortality of up to 40%. With screening, the incidence rises to 1% of all blunt trauma patients and as high as 2.7% in patients with an Injury Severity Score of >or=16. The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma organization Practice Management Guidelines committee set out to develop an EBM guideline for the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of BCVI. METHODS A computerized search of the National Library of Medicine/National Institute of Health, Medline database was performed using citations from 1965 to 2005 inclusive. Titles and abstracts were reviewed to determine relevance, and isolated case reports, small case series, editorials, letters to the editor, and review articles were eliminated. The bibliographies of the resulting full-text articles were searched for other relevant citations, and these were obtained as needed. These papers were reviewed based on the following questions: 1. What patients are of high enough risk, so that diagnostic evaluation should be pursued for the screening and diagnosis of BCVI? 2. What is the appropriate modality for the screening and diagnosis of BCVI? 3. How should BCVI be treated? 4. If indicated, for how long should antithrombotic therapy be administered? 5. How should one monitor the response to therapy? RESULTS One hundred seventy-nine articles were selected for review, and of these, 68 met inclusion criteria and are excerpted in the attached evidentiary table and used to make recommendations. CONCLUSIONS The East Practice Management Guidelines Committee suggests guidelines that should be safe and efficacious for the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of BCVI. Risk factors for screening are identified (see ), screening modalities are reviewed indicating that although angiography remains the gold standard, multi-planar (>or==8 slice) CT angiography may be equivalent, and treatment algorithms are evaluated. It is noted that change in the diagnosis and management of this injury constellation is rapid due to technological advancement and the difficulties inherent in performing randomized prospective trials in this patient population.

Practice management guidelines for geriatric trauma: the EAST Practice Management Guidelines Work Group.

Advanced age is a well-recognized risk factor for adverse outcomes after trauma. A substantial body of literature, much of it cited within this article, demonstrates increased morbidity and mortality in geriatric trauma patients compared with their younger counterparts. Whether this outcome difference is because of the decreased physiologic reserve that accompanies aging, a higher incidence of preexisting medical conditions in the geriatric patient, or other factors yet to be identified remains unclear. It is clear, however, that good outcomes can be achieved in this patient population when appropriately aggressive trauma care is directed toward geriatric patients with survivable injuries. Implicit in the above statement is the need to identify, as soon as possible after injury, those patients who will benefit from aggressive resuscitation, timely injury management, and posttrauma rehabilitation. It is equally important, however, to limit these intensive and expensive treatment modalities to patients whose injuries are not only survivable but also compatible with an acceptable quality of life. Our purpose in developing this guideline was to provide the trauma practitioner with some evidence-based recommendations that could be used to guide decision-making in the care of the geriatric trauma patient. We began this process by first developing a series of questions, the answers to which we hoped could be supported by the existing scientific literature. The initial set of questions were as follows: 1. Is age itself a marker of increased morbidity/ mortality? If so, what age should be used? 2. Is age instead a surrogate for increased preexisting conditions (PECs)? If so, which premorbid conditions are particularly predictive of poor outcomes? 3. Should age itself be a criterion for triage from the field directly to a trauma center, regardless of Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, Trauma Score (TS), and so forth? If so, what age should be used? 4. Do trauma centers have better outcomes with geriatric trauma than nontrauma centers? 5. Are there specific injuries, scores (e.g., Injury Severity Score [ISS], TS, GCS score), or PEC/age combinations in geriatric trauma patients that are so unlikely to be survivable that a nonaggressive approach from the outset could be justified? 6. What resuscitation end-points should be used for the geriatric trauma patient? 7. Should all geriatric trauma patients receive invasive hemodynamic monitoring? If so, what specific types of monitoring should be used? If not, which geriatric patients benefit from invasive monitoring? Unfortunately, after examining the available literature, it is clear that evidence-based responses to all of the questions raised above are not possible. As the evidentiary tables demonstrate, there are few, if any, prospective, randomized, controlled trials that definitively address any of the above issues. Second, there is a lack of uniformity as to a specific age criterion for geriatric trauma. As shown in the evidentiary tables, geriatric trauma is variously defined in the literature as age greater than or equal to 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, and even 80 years of age. There is even literature support for increased mortality from trauma beginning at age 45! Furthermore, because age is a continuous variable, and not a dichotomous one, adverse outcomes associated with geriatric trauma are likely to increase in a continuous fashion with age as opposed to a stepwise leap as a given patient reaches a specific age. Third, there is no concise definition of a geriatric trauma patient. In some studies, all patients over a given age are included, whereas in others, patients with penetrating injuries, burns, and minor injuries, such as slip-and-falls, are excluded. Some studies include all patients regardless of hemodynamic instability or injury severity, whereas others impose strict entrance criteria or exclude patients who do not survive for a predetermined period of time after admission. Such lack of uniformity regarding inclusion criteria makes it Submitted for publication October 3, 2001. Accepted for publication September 16, 2002. Copyright

Practice management guidelines for nutritional support of the trauma patient.

Nutritional support is an integral, though often neglected, component of the care of the critically injured patient. Our understanding of the metabolic changes associated with starvation, stress, and sepsis has deepened over the past 20 to 30 years, and along with this has come a greater appreciation for the importance of the timing, composition, and route of administration of nutritional support to the trauma patient. Although supportive data exist for many of our current nutritional practices, the trauma surgeon cannot assume that interventions that are successful in laboratory animals or even in the critically ill nontrauma patient will produce the same results in critically ill trauma patients. Stanley J. Dudrick, MD, one of the forefathers of surgical nutrition in this country, put it this way: “. . .we do get ourselves into an awful lot of trouble and lack of consensus as a result of mixing in animal data together with normal, starved man data when we are talking about trauma, especially in burns.” For this reason, the recommendations provided in this guideline are based, when at all possible, on studies using trauma or burn patients. Nevertheless, a brief discussion of some of the basic science principles of nutritional support is provided in the following section as a backdrop for the clinical studies presented in this guideline. This practice management guideline is a compilation of six separate guidelines; each addresses a specific aspect of the nutritional support of the trauma patient. These topics are presented in the following order: A. Route of nutritional support (total parenteral nutrition vs. total enteral nutrition). B. Timing of nutritional support (early vs. late). C. Site of nutritional support (gastric vs. jejunal). D. Macronutrient formulation (how many calories and what proportion of protein, carbohydrate, and fat?). E. Monitoring of nutritional support (which tests and how often?). F. Type of nutritional support (standard vs. enhanced). Each subguideline is a separate and free-standing document, with its own recommendations, evidentiary tables, and references. Where possible, we have attempted to eliminate redundancy and ensure consistency among the guidelines. Yet, because of substantial differences in both the quantity as well as the quality of supporting scientific data for each topic, and the fact that certain clinical circumstances are not conducive to a single guideline, concise and consistent recommendations were not always possible. Even when Class I (prospective, randomized, controlled) studies were available, limited patient numbers and inconsistent definitions rendered study conclusions less authoritative that they might have otherwise been. Recognizing the need to incorporate the major recommendations from the subguidelines into a logical overall approach to the nutritional support of the trauma patient, a summary algorithm is provided at the conclusion of the guideline (Fig. 1). Because of the scope of this document, many of the recommendations from the subguidelines could not be included in the algorithm. In addition, distinguishing between the various levels of recommendations (I, II, and III) within the algorithm was not practical. Nevertheless, the algorithm provides a safe, reasonable, and literature-supported approach to nutritional support and, we hope, will provoke constructive discussion and stimulate further investigation.

Hemodynamic and fibrinolytic consequences of intermittent pneumatic compression: preliminary results.

OBJECTIVE To elucidate the time course and magnitude of hemodynamic and fibrinolytic changes associated with sequential gradient intermittent pneumatic compression (SGIPC). DESIGN Two-phase, intervention and response investigation in normal volunteers. MATERIALS AND METHODS Subjects were assigned to control (phase I) or compression (phase II) groups. Serial blood samples were obtained via femoral venous catheters for tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI-1), tPA-PAI-1 complex (tPA-PAI), and euglobulin lysis time (ELT) from all subjects and for fibrin degradation products (FbDP) and fibrinogen degradation products (FgDP) from phase II subjects. Duplex venous scanning was carried out on phase II subjects before and during SGIPC. RESULTS Catheter placement caused elevations in PAI-1 and tPA-PAI, which stabilized within 4 hours of catheter insertion. In phase II, SGIPC induced significant increases in FbDP, FgDP, and tPA-PAI and decreases in ELT and PAI-1, all of which quickly reverted to baseline on termination of compression. Femoral venous blood flow increased by more than 100% with SGIPC. CONCLUSIONS Sequential gradient intermittent pneumatic compression induces prompt, but short-lived, alterations in both fibrinolytic and hemodynamic function. Noncontinuous SGIPC may result in suboptimal thromboembolic prophylaxis.

Value of point-of-care blood testing in emergent trauma management.

BACKGROUND No prospective study demonstrates the value of point-of-care laboratory testing (POCT) in the management of major trauma. METHODS In a prospective, noninterventional, study of 200 major trauma patients, we evaluated the influence of a blood POCT profile (hemoglobin, Na+, K+, Cl-, blood urea nitrogen, glucose, pH, PCO2, PO2, HCO3-, base deficit, and lactate) on emergent diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Physicians responded to a standardized set of questions on their diagnostic and therapeutic plans before and after the availability of POCT results. Management plan changes were deemed emergently appropriate, if they were influenced by the POCT results and, within the ensuing 30 minutes, the change in management was likely to reduce morbidity or conserve resources. RESULTS For emergently appropriate plan changes, Na+, Cl-, K+, and blood urea nitrogen were never influential, whereas in each of 6.0% of cases (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.5%-10.2%) at least one of the remaining POCT parameters was influential. An emergently appropriate change was based on hemoglobin in 3.5% of cases (95% CI, 1.0%-6.1%), blood gas parameters in 3.0% of cases (95% CI, 0.64%-5.7%), lactate in 2.5% of cases (95% CI, 1.1%-5.7%), and glucose in 0.5% of cases (95% CI, 0.1%-2.8%). All of these cases involved blunt injury. CONCLUSION Na+, Cl-, K+, and blood urea nitrogen levels do not influence the initial management of major trauma patients. In patients with severe blunt injury, hemoglobin, glucose, blood gas, and lactate measurements occasionally result in morbidity-reducing or resource-conserving management changes.

A thoracostomy tube guideline improves management efficiency in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND Thoracostomy tube (TT) placement constitutes primary treatment for traumatic hemopneumothorax. Practice patterns vary widely, and criteria for management and removal remain poorly defined. In this cohort study, we examined the impact of implementation of a practice guideline (PG) on improving management efficiency of thoracostomy tube. METHODS We developed a PG aimed at standardizing the management of TTs in critically ill patients admitted to a Level I trauma center. During the 9-month period before (Pre-PG) and 3 months after (Post-PG) implementation, practice parameters including prophylactic antibiotics, duration of TT therapy, preremoval chest radiographs with associated charges, and complications were evaluated. Differences between groups were assessed by Mann-Whitney rank sum and chi(2) with Yates correction. RESULTS There were 61 patients, 14 in the Pre-PG group and 47 in the Post-PG group. The groups were matched in age and Injury Severity Scores. The Post-PG cohort averaged 3 fewer days of TT therapy. After implementation of the PG, 21 patients did not have preremoval chest radiography, representing a

Safety and accuracy of bedside carbon dioxide cavography for insertion of inferior vena cava filters in the intensive care unit.

3000 reduction in radiology fees. Complication rates (retained pneumothorax, hemothorax, and empyema) were not different between the two groups. CONCLUSION Implementation of a thoracostomy tube practice guideline was associated with improved management efficiency in trauma patients.

Bedside insertion of inferior vena cava filters in the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND Bedside insertion of inferior vena caval filters (IVCFs) avoids risks associated with transporting these critically ill patients to the operating room or to the radiology suite. But because IVCF insertion requires preinsertion caval imaging, the risk of contrast-induced renal failure remains a concern. Carbon dioxide (CO2) as a contrast agent does not cause renal failure, but its accuracy in determining vena caval diameter (a critical factor in filter selection) and its safety in the critical care population are unknown. This study is designed to assess the safety of using CO2 as a contrast agent in this patient population and to evaluate its accuracy in determining the diameter of the inferior vena cava when used at the bedside. STUDY DESIGN A prospective study comparing CO2 with iodinated contrast (IC) material was performed in critically ill patients undergoing vena cavography before bedside IVCF placement. CO2 cavagrams were performed with one or more hand injections of 60 mL of CO2; a single injection of 40 mL of IC material was used. Digital subtraction techniques were used for all of the studies. Blood pressure, pulse rate, and arterial oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2, and intracranial pressure (when available) were recorded before, during, and after contrast injection. Statistical analysis was performed using the paired t-test, with p < 0.05 being considered significant. Data are expressed as mean +/- SD. RESULTS Twenty-three patients were studied. Mean transverse inferior vena cava (IVC) diameters measured 20.4 +/- 0.7mm (IC) and 20.0 +/- 0.7mm (CO2); p = 0.003. The difference in the measurements was 0.4 +/- 0.1 mm, with the largest difference being 1.7mm. In the remaining 10 patients, CO2 differed from IC in determining IVC diameter by only 0.4mm, a statistically significant (p < 0.05) but clinically insignificant difference. No adverse effects on blood pressure, pulse, arterial oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2, or intracranial pressure were noted with the use of CO2. CONCLUSIONS Carbon dioxide as a contrast agent is safe and provides accurate determination of vena caval diameter and anatomy. Carbon dioxide should be considered the contrast agent of choice in critically ill patients.

Abdominal CT scanning for trauma: how low can we go?

BACKGROUND Several authors have showed that bedside insertion of inferior vena cava filters (IVCF) is feasible and cost effective, with the additional benefit of not having to transport a critically ill patient to the operating room or radiology department. The objective of this study was to examine our experience of 158 IVCF insertions at the bedside in the intensive care unit. STUDY DESIGN A prospective, observational study of bedside IVCF insertion performed by the authors from February 1996 through August 2000 was undertaken. RESULTS One hundred fifty-eight patients underwent bedside IVCF insertion in the intensive care unit. The mean age was 42.2 years (SD 17.5 years). The mean Injury Severity Score of the trauma patients was 27.3 (SD 14.5). The majority of patients (90%) had a prophylactic indication for IVCF insertion using our institutional guidelines for venous thromboembolic prophylaxis for trauma patients. All IVCF insertions were successfully performed at the bedside after iodinated contrast or carbon dioxide cavography. The mortality was 11% (n = 18), none attributable to the IVCF insertion or cavagram. There was one asymptomatic cava occlusion and one postinsertion pulmonary embolus in a patients with a subclavian vein thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS Our results demonstrate the safety and efficacy of IVCF insertion at the bedside in the ICU. This method offers less resource use and more safety for critically ill patients, avoiding the hazards of intrahospital transport.

Peritoneal lavage white count: a reassessment.

PURPOSE computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen is an established, albeit expensive and perhaps overused, diagnostic modality for the evaluation of the injured patient. We developed a practice management guideline for blunt abdominal trauma intended to reduce the percentage of negative CT scans, yet minimize delayed recognition of injury and non-therapeutic laparotomy. PROCEDURES between April 1996 and March 1997, 1147 adult patients at risk for blunt abdominal injury were admitted to our Level I trauma centre and underwent abdominal evaluation according to the practice management guideline. MAIN FINDINGS abdominal CT was performed in 522 patients (45%), and 441 scans were negative (85%). Delayed recognition of injury and non-therapeutic laparotomy rates were low, 4% and 1.6%, respectively. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSION abdominal CT scanning in trauma patients can achieve low non-therapeutic laparotomy and delayed recognition of injury rates but at the expense of high negative CT scan rates. Greater reliance on the physical examination and perhaps abdominal ultrasound may reduce negative CT scan rates and yet preserve low non-therapeutic laparotomy and delayed recognition of injury rates.