Frederick B. Rogers

Practice Management Guidelines for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Trauma Patients: The EAST Practice Management Guidelines Work Group

These original guidelines were developed by interested trauma surgeons in 1997 for the EAST Web site (www.eas- t.org), where a brief summary of four guidelines was pub- lished. A revised, complete, and significantly edited practice management guidelines for the prevention of venous throm- boembolism in trauma patients is presented herein. The step-by-step process of practice management guide- line development, as outlined by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR), has been used as the meth- odology for the development of these guidelines. 2 Briefly, the first step in guideline development is a classification of sci- entific evidence. A Class I study is a prospective, randomized controlled trial. A Class II study is a clinical study with prospectively collected data or large retrospective analyses with reliable data. A Class III study is retrospective data, expert opinion, or a case report. Once the evidence is classi- fied, it can be used to make recommendations. A Level I recommendation is convincingly justifiable on the basis of the scientific information alone. Usually, such a recommen- dation is made on the basis of a preponderance of Class I data, but some strong Class II data can be used. A Level II rec- ommendation means the recommendation is reasonably jus- tifiable, usually on the basis of a preponderance of Class II data. If there are not enough Class I data to support a Level I recommendation, they may be used to support a Level II recommendation. A Level III recommendation is generally only supported by Class III data. These practice guidelines address eight different areas of practice management as they relate to the prevention and diagnosis of venous thromboembolism in trauma patients. There are few Level I recommendations because there is a paucity of Class I data in the area of trauma literature. We believe it is important to highlight areas where future inves- tigation may bring about definitive Level I recommendations.

Multicenter, randomized, prospective trial of early tracheostomy

OBJECTIVES Determine the effect of early (days 3-5) or late (days 10-14) tracheostomy on intensive care unit length of stay (ICU LOS), frequency of pneumonia, and mortality, and evidence of short-term or long-term pharyngeal, laryngeal, or tracheal injury in head trauma, non-head trauma, and critically ill nontrauma patients. STUDY DESIGN Randomized, prospective. SETTING Five Level I trauma centers. METHODS Data were obtained prospectively and included Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score (AIII), Glasgow Coma Scale score, Emergency Room Trauma Score, Injury Severity Score, Acute Injury Score, type of endotracheal tube or tracheostomy, level of positive end-expiratory pressure, and peak inspiratory pressure. Patients were to undergo laryngoscopy for detection of injury according to the Lindholm criteria at the time of endotracheal tube or tracheostomy removal and be reevaluated at 3 to 5 months after discharge. RESULTS One hundred fifty-seven patients were entered, 127 to early randomization (3-5 days) and 28 to late randomization (10-14 days); however, only 112 patients with early and 14 with late randomization had completed data forms for the primary study goals. An additional 22 patients from the early entry groups were rerandomized late. Early randomization data: the AIII score was higher (p < 0.05) in the head trauma tracheostomy (65 +/- 4) than in the nontracheostomy group (51 +/- 4) and in the nontrauma tracheostomy (92 +/- 6) than in the nontracheostomy group (68 +/- 7), but was equivalent in the non-head trauma group. Glasgow Coma Scale score, Emergency Room Trauma Score, Injury Severity Score, Acute Injury Score, positive end-expiratory pressure, and peak inspiratory pressure were not significantly different in any of the groups. There were no significant differences in ICU LOS, frequency of pneumonia, or death in any of the groups after either early or late tracheostomy compared with continued endotracheal intubation. Only 83 patients underwent postextubation laryngoscopy. There were no significant differences between the groups; however, there were trends to more vocal cord ulceration and subglottic inflammation in the continued intubation group. No patient was seen in this study with late vocal cord or laryngeal stenosis; there were no tracheal-innominate artery fistulae. Seven of the patients with abnormal findings at extubation had normal 3- to 5-month postextubation laryngoscopy. CONCLUSION Physician bias limited patient entry into the study. Although there were higher AIII scores in the head trauma early tracheostomy patients, there were no differences in the primary end points of ICU LOS, pneumonia, or death in any of the groups studied. Long-term endoscopic follow-up was poor, but no known late tracheal stenosis was seen.

The Deleterious Effects Of Intraoperative Hypotension On Outcome In Patients With Severe Head Injuries

Prehospital or admission hypotension doubles the mortality for patients with severe head injury (SHI = Glasgow Coma Scale score less than or equal to 8). To our knowledge no study to date has determined the effects of intraoperative hypotension [IH: systolic blood pressure (SBP) less than 90 mm Hg] on outcome in patients with SHI. This study examined 53 patients who had SHI and required early surgical intervention (surgery within 72 hours of injury). All patients were initially normotensive on arrival. There were 17 patients (32%) who developed IH and 36 (68%) who remained normotensive throughout surgery. The mortality rate was 82% in the IH group and 25% in the normotensive group (p less than 0.001). The duration of IH was inversely correlated with Glasgow Outcome Scale using linear regression (R = -0.30; p = 0.02). Despite vigorous fluid resuscitation in the IH group, additional pharmacologic support was used in only 32%. These data suggest that IH is not uncommon after SHI (32%) and that it does have a significant effect on patient outcome.

Improving the Glasgow Coma Scale score: motor score alone is a better predictor

BACKGROUND The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) has served as an assessment tool in head trauma and as a measure of physiologic derangement in outcome models (e.g., TRISS and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation), but it has not been rigorously examined as a predictor of outcome. METHODS Using a large trauma data set (National Trauma Data Bank, N = 204,181), we compared the predictive power (pseudo R2, receiver operating characteristic [ROC]) and calibration of the GCS to its components. RESULTS The GCS is actually a collection of 120 different combinations of its 3 predictors grouped into 12 different scores by simple addition (motor [m] + verbal [v] + eye [e] = GCS score). Problematically, different combinations summing to a single GCS score may actually have very different mortalities. For example, the GCS score of 4 can represent any of three mve combinations: 2/1/1 (survival = 0.52), 1/2/1 (survival = 0.73), or 1/1/2 (survival = 0.81). In addition, the relationship between GCS score and survival is not linear, and furthermore, a logistic model based on GCS score is poorly calibrated even after fractional polynomial transformation. The m component of the GCS, by contrast, is not only linearly related to survival, but preserves almost all the predictive power of the GCS (ROC(GCS) = 0.89, ROC(m) = 0.87; pseudo R2(GCS) = 0.42, pseudo R2(m) = 0.40) and has a better calibrated logistic model. CONCLUSION Because the motor component of the GCS contains virtually all the information of the GCS itself, can be measured in intubated patients, and is much better behaved statistically than the GCS, we believe that the motor component of the GCS should replace the GCS in outcome prediction models. Because the m component is nonlinear in the log odds of survival, however, it should be mathematically transformed before its inclusion in broader outcome prediction models.

Hypertonic saline resuscitation of patients with head injury: a prospective, randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND Experimental and clinical work has suggested that hypertonic saline (HTS) would be better than lactated Ringers solution (LRS) for the resuscitation of patients with head injuries. No clinical study has examined the effect of HTS infusion on intracranial pressure (ICP) and outcome in patients with head injuries. We hypothesized that HTS infusion would result in a lower ICP and fewer medical interventions to lower ICP compared with LRS. METHODS/DESIGN Prospective, randomized clinical trial at two teaching hospitals. RESULTS Thirty-four patients were enrolled and were similar in age and Injury Severity Score. HTS patients had a lower admission Glasgow Coma Scale score (HTS: 4.7+/-0.7; LRS: 6.7+/-0.7; p = 0.057), a higher initial ICP (HTS: 16+/-2; LRS: 11+/-2; p = 0.06), and a higher initial mean maximum ICP (HTS: 31+/-3; LRS: 18+/-2; p < 0.01). Treatment effectively lowered ICP in both groups, and there was no significant difference between the groups in ICP at any time after entry. HTS patients required significantly more interventions (HTS: 31+/-4; LRS: 11+/-3; p < 0.01). During the study, the change in maximum ICP was positive in the LRS group but negative in the HTS group (LRS: +2+/-3; HTS: -9+/-4; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION As a group, HTS patients had more severe head injuries. HTS and LRS used with other therapies effectively controlled the ICP. The widely held conviction that sodium administration will lead to a sustained increase in ICP is not supported by this work.

Early fixation reduces morbidity and mortality in elderly patients with hip fractures from low-impact falls

OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of the timing of fracture fixation and the physiologic status on admission of elderly patients with hip fractures from low impact falls on resource utilization and outcome. METHODS A 5-year retrospective review of 82 elderly (age > 65 years) patients with isolated low-impact hip fractures stratified into early (< 24 hours), intermediate (24 to 72 hours), and late (> 72 hours) operative fixation. Admission Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores, number of comorbidities, fracture type, complication rate, length of stay, discharge acuity, and mortality were calculated for each group. RESULTS Values are mean +/- SD. The mean admission APACHE II score of the entire group was 8.1 +/- 0.2, indicating that these patients were physiologically stable on arrival. The mean numbers of comorbidities or APACHE II were not significant between groups. No differences existed in the mean APACHE II scores for survivors and nonsurvivors (7.95 +/- 2.34 vs. 9.17 +/- 3.06, p = 0.2409). There were no differences in the mean APACHE II scores and predicted survival for each group. However, a significant decrease in actual survival was observed with late fixation (p < 0.001; Fishers Exact Test). Patients who were fixed late also had a significantly higher infectious morbidity (p = 0.00469), length of stays (p = 0.0226), and total hospital cost (p = 0.0001), compared with those fixed early or immediate, despite having no difference in average acuity upon discharge (p = 0.3883). CONCLUSIONS Delay in fracture fixation, in elderly patients who are physiologically stable on admission, significantly increases morbidity and mortality and adversely affects resource utilization.

Hypercoagulability is most prevalent early after injury and in female patients

BACKGROUND Hypercoagulability after injury is a major source of morbidity and mortality. Recent studies indicate that there is a gender-specific risk in trauma patients. This study was performed to determine the course of coagulation after injury and to determine whether there is a gender difference. We hypothesized that hypercoagulability would occur early after injury and that there would be no difference between men and women. METHODS This was a prospective cohort study. Inclusion criteria were admission to the intensive care unit, Injury Severity Score > 4, and the ability to obtain consent from the patient or a relative. A Thrombelastograph (TEG) analysis was performed and routine coagulation parameters and thrombin-antithrombin complexes were measured within 24 hours of injury and then daily for 4 days. RESULTS Sixty-five patients met criteria for entry into the study. Their mean age was 42 +/- 17 years and their mean Injury Severity Score was 23 +/- 12. Forty patients (62%) were men. The prevalence of a hypercoagulable state by TEG was 62% on day 1 and 26% on day 4 (p < 0.01). Women were significantly more hypercoagulable on day 1 than men as measured by the time to onset of clotting (women, 2.9 +/- 0.7 minutes; men, 3.9 +/- 1.5 minutes; p < 0.01; normal, 3.7-8.3 minutes). Mean platelet counts, international normalized ratios, and partial thromboplastin times were within normal limits throughout the study. Thrombin activation as measured by thrombin-antithrombin complexes decreased from 34 +/- 15 microg/L on day 1 to 18 +/- 8 microg/L (p < 0.01) on day 4, consistent with the prevalence of hypercoagulability by TEG. CONCLUSION Hypercoagulability after injury is most prevalent during the first 24 hours. Women are more hypercoagulable than men early after injury. The TEG is more sensitive than routine coagulation assays for the detection of a hypercoagulable state.

Prophylactic Vena Cava Filter Insertion In Severely Injured Trauma Patients: Indications And Preliminary Results

Pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a significant problem in trauma patients. A 5-year review at this institution revealed 25 PEs (seven fatal) in 2525 admitted trauma patients (1% incidence). Three groups of high-risk patients were identified: (1) those with severe head injury and coma; (2) those with spinal cord injuries with neurologic deficit; and (3) those with pelvic and long bone fractures. The relative risk of PE in these high-risk patients was 21 to 54 times that of the general trauma population. Beginning in July 1991, as prophylaxis against PE, vena cava filters (VCF) were inserted in patients whose injuries placed them in a high-risk group. Thirty-four patients had VCFs inserted percutaneously in the radiology suite without complications. On follow-up examination, 17.6% developed documented lower extremity deep vein thrombosis. There were no PEs. Overall, the incidence of PE in the general trauma population was significantly decreased from 1% to 0.25% (p < 0.05; chi 2). We conclude that insertion of VCFs in high-risk trauma patients is safe and efficacious in decreasing the incidence of PE.

Prevention of stress ulceration: current trends in critical care.

Objective:To identify the level of current intensivist’s knowledge regarding risk assessment and intensive care unit (ICU) clinical practice pertaining to stress-related mucosal bleeding, including pharmacologic approaches for stress ulcer prevention. Design:A nationwide survey of critical care physicians. Study Population:Two thousand random physician members of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Measurements and Main Results:The response rate was 519 (26%) of 2000, with data analysis from 501 (25.1%) usable surveys. Respondents were affiliated with internal medicine (44.3%), surgery (42.3%), and anesthesiology (12.6%). Gut ischemia was indicated as the perceived major cause of stress ulceration (59.7%). The estimated incidence of clinically important bleeding was 2% or less by 62% of respondents; however, 28.6% of physicians surveyed initiate stress ulcer prophylaxis in all ICU patients, regardless of bleeding risk. Respiratory failure was most frequently indicated as a reason for stress ulcer prophylaxis (68.6%), followed by shock/hypotension (49.4%), sepsis (39.4%), and head injury/major neurologic insult (35.2%). The first-line agents selected for stress ulcer prophylaxis include histamine-2 receptor antagonists (63.9%), followed by proton pump inhibitors (23.1%), and sucralfate (12.2%). Concern for nosocomial pneumonia was regarded as more prevalent with antisecretory therapies in those who chose sucralfate (61%) as initial therapy compared with overall respondents (26.9%) (p < .001). Conclusions:The majority of intensivists surveyed recognize stress-related mucosal bleeding as a relatively infrequent event; however, implementation of a stress ulcer prophylaxis risk stratification scheme for ICU patients is necessary. Histamine-2 receptor antagonists are consistently perceived as appropriate initial agents, although proton pump inhibitors have become first-line therapy in an increasing percentage of critical care patients, despite limited data regarding their use in this population.

Do pediatric trauma centers have better survival rates than adult trauma centers? An examination of the National Pediatric Trauma Registry.

BACKGROUND Pediatric trauma centers (PTCs) were developed to improve the survival of injured children, but it is currently unknown if children admitted to PTCs are more likely to survive than those admitted to adult trauma centers (ATCs). METHODS Fifty-three thousand one hundred thirteen pediatric trauma cases from 22 PTCs and 31 ATCs included in the National Pediatric Trauma Registry were reviewed to evaluate survival rates at PTCs and ATCs. RESULTS Overall, 1,259 children died. The raw mortality rate was lower at PTCs (1.81% of 32,554 children) than at ATCs (3.88% of 18,368 children). However, patients admitted to ATCs were more severely injured. When Injury Severity Score, Pediatric Trauma Score, mechanism (blunt or penetrating), gender, age, clustering, and American College of Surgeons (ACS) verification status were controlled for using a single logistic regression model, there was no statistically significant difference in survival between PTCs and ATCs (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.26; p = 0.587). A similar comparison of the 12 ACS-verified trauma centers with the 41 nonverified centers showed verification to be associated with improved survival (odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.97; p = 0.013). CONCLUSION Although PTCs have higher overall survival rates than ATCs, this difference disappears when the analysis controls for Injury Severity Score, Pediatric Trauma Score, age, mechanism, and ACS verification status. ACS-verified centers have significantly higher survival rates than do unverified centers.