Jason Pasley

Implementation of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta as an alternative to resuscitative thoracotomy for noncompressible truncal hemorrhage

BACKGROUND Hemorrhage remains the leading cause of death in trauma patients. Proximal aortic occlusion, usually performed by direct aortic cross-clamping via thoracotomy, can provide temporary hemodynamic stability, permitting definitive injury repair. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) uses a minimally invasive, transfemoral balloon catheter, which is rapidly inserted retrograde and inflated for aortic occlusion, and may control inflow and allow time for hemostasis. We compared resuscitative thoracotomy with aortic cross-clamping (RT) with REBOA in trauma patients in profound hemorrhagic shock. METHODS Trauma registry data was used to compare all patients undergoing RT or REBOA during an 18-month period from two Level 1 trauma centers. RESULTS There was no difference between RT (n = 72) and REBOA groups (n = 24) in terms of demographics, mechanism of injury, or Injury Severity Scores (ISSs). There was no difference in chest and abdominal Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) scores between the groups. However, the RT patients had lower extremity AIS score as compared with REBOA patients (1.5 [0–3] vs. 4 [3–4], p < 0.001). Of the 72 RT patients, 45 (62.5%) died in the emergency department, 6 (8.3%) died in the operating room, and 14 (19.4%) died in the intensive care unit. Of the 24 REBOA patients, 4 (16.6%) died in the emergency department, 3 (12.5%) died in the operating room, and 8 (33.3%) died in the intensive care unit. In comparing location of death between the RT and REBOA groups, there were a significantly higher number of deaths in the emergency department among the RT patients as compared with the REBOA patients (62.5% vs. 16.7%, p < 0.001). REBOA had fewer early deaths and improved overall survival as compared with RT (37.5% vs. 9.7%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION REBOA is feasible and controls noncompressible truncal hemorrhage in trauma patients in profound shock. Patients undergoing REBOA have improved overall survival and fewer early deaths as compared with patients undergoing RT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic study, level IV.

Basic endovascular skills for trauma course: bridging the gap between endovascular techniques and the acute care surgeon.

BACKGROUND The use of catheter-based skills is increasing in the field of vascular trauma. Virtual reality simulation (VRS) is a well-established means of endovascular skills training, and potentially lifesaving skills such as resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) may be obtained through VRS. METHODS Thirteen faculty members in the Division of Trauma and Critical Care performed REBOA six times on the Vascular Intervention System Training Simulator–C after a didactic and instructional session. Subjects were excluded if they had taken a similar endovascular training course, had additional training in endovascular surgery, or had performed this procedure in the clinical setting. Performance metrics included procedural time; accurate placement of guide wire, sheath, and balloon; correct sequence of steps; economy of motion; and safe use of endovascular tools. A precourse and postcourse test and questionnaire were performed by each subject. RESULTS Significant improvements in knowledge (p = 0.0013) and procedural task times (p < 0.0001) were observed at the completion of the course. No correlation was observed with endovascular experience in residency, number of central and arterial catheters placed weekly, or other parameters. All trainees strongly agreed that the course was beneficial, and the majority would recommend this training to other acute care surgeons. CONCLUSION Damage control endovascular procedures can be effectively taught using VRS. Significant improvements in procedural time and knowledge can be achieved regardless of endovascular experience in residency, years since residency, or other parameters. Novice interventionalists (acute care surgeons) can add a specific skill set (REBOA) to their existing core competencies, which has the potential to improve the survival and/or outcomes of severely injured patients.

Intraosseous infusion rates under high pressure: a cadaveric comparison of anatomic sites.

BACKGROUND When traditional vascular access methods fail, emergency access through the intraosseous (IO) route can be lifesaving. Fluids, medications, and blood components have all been delivered through these devices. We sought to compare the performance of IO devices placed in the sternum, humeral head, and proximal tibia using a fresh human cadaver model. METHODS Commercially available IO infusion devices were placed into fresh human cadavers: sternum (FAST-1), humeral head (EZ-IO), and proximal tibia (EZ-IO). Sequentially, the volume of 0.9% saline infused into each site under 300 mm Hg pressure over 5 minutes was measured. Rates of successful initial IO device placement and subjective observations related to the devices were also recorded. RESULTS For 16 cadavers over a 5-minute bolus infusion, the total volume of fluid infused at the three IO access sites was 469 (190) mL for the sternum, 286 (218) mL for the humerus, and 154 (94) mL for the tibia. Thus, the mean (SD) flow rate infused at each site was as follows: (1) sternum, 93.7 (37.9) mL/min; (2) humerus, 57.1 (43.5) mL/min; and (3) tibia, 30.7 (18.7) mL/min. The tibial site had the greatest number of insertion difficulties. CONCLUSION This is the first study comparing the rate of flow at the three most clinically used adult IO infusion sites in an adult human cadaver model. Our results showed that the sternal site for IO access provided the most consistent and highest flow rate compared with the humeral and tibial insertion sites. The average flow rate in the sternum was 1.6 times greater than in the humerus and 3.1 times greater than in the tibia.

Use of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta for Proximal Aortic Control in Patients With Severe Hemorrhage and Arrest

Importance Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a percutaneous transfemoral balloon technique used in select centers for resuscitation and temporary hemostasis, often instead of emergency department thoracotomy. The ability to perform aortic occlusion (AO) with an intravascular device allows focused occlusion at the most distal level to perfuse proximal regions while slowing hemorrhage to injured areas. Objective To describe what is to date the largest single-institution experience with REBOA in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants Use of REBOA at an urban tertiary care facility for severe traumatic hemorrhage, traumatic arrest (AR), or nontraumatic hemorrhage (NTH) was investigated from February 1, 2013, to January 31, 2017, among 90 patients who were not responsive or were transiently responsive to resuscitation measures, or were in arrest, from presumed hemorrhage below the diaphragm. Possible causes were trauma or nontrauma-related hemorrhage. Patients with ruptured aortic aneurysms were excluded. Main Outcomes and Measures In-hospital mortality. Results Of the 90 patients in the study (15 women and 75 men; mean [SD] age, 41.5 [17.4] years), 29 underwent REBOA for severe traumatic hemorrhage, 50 for AR, and 11 for NTH. For the patients with severe traumatic hemorrhage and AR, the median age was 36.2 years (interquartile range, 25.3-55.5 years), mean (SD) admission Glasgow Coma Scale score was 6 (5), and median Injury Severity Score was 39 (interquartile range, 10-75). The distal thoracic aorta was occluded in 73 patients (81%), and in all patients with AR. A total of 17 patients (19%) had distal abdominal AO. Mean (SD) systolic blood pressure improved in patients with severe traumatic hemorrhage, from 68 (28) mm Hg prior to AO, to 131 (12) mm Hg after AO (P < .001). Percutaneous access was used in 30 patients (33%), including 13 patients with AR (26%), and groin cutdown in 60 patients (67%), including 37 patients with AR (74%). Overall 30-day mortality was 62% (n = 56): 11 (39%) in patients with severe traumatic hemorrhage and 45 (90%) in patients with AR. Of the patients with AR, 29 (58%) had return of spontaneous circulation and 11 of those patients (38%) survived to the operating room. All patients who survived AR gained full neurologic recovery. No aortoiliac injury or limb loss occurred from REBOA use. Eleven patients underwent REBOA for NTH; 7 (64%) were in arrest. Overall in-hospital mortality for patients with NTH was 36% (n = 4). No procedural complications occurred in this group. Conclusions and Relevance REBOA is a minimally invasive alternative to emergency department thoracotomy with aortic cross-clamp to temporize noncompressible torso hemorrhage and obtain proximal control in both traumatic and nontraumatic causes of hemorrhage. REBOA can also be used for more targeted AO in the distal aorta for pelvic, junctional, or extremity hemorrhage.

Identification of dynamic prehospital changes with continuous vital signs acquisition.

OBJECTIVE In most trauma registries, prehospital trauma data are often missing or unreliable because of the difficult dual task consigned to prehospital providers of recording vital signs and simultaneously resuscitating patients. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that the analysis of continuous vital signs acquired automatically, without prehospital provider input, improves vital signs data quality, captures more extreme values that might be missed with conventional human data recording, and changes Trauma Injury Severity Scores compared with retrospectively compiled prehospital trauma registry data. METHODS A statewide vital signs collection network in 6 medevac helicopters was deployed for prehospital vital signs acquisition using a locally built vital signs data recorder (VSDR) to capture continuous vital signs from the patient monitor onto a memory card. VSDR vital signs data were assessed by 3 raters, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to test interrater reliability. Agreement between VSDR and trauma registry data was compared with the methods of Altman and Bland including corresponding calculations for precision and bias. RESULTS Automated prehospital continuous VSDR data were collected in 177 patients. There was good agreement between the first recorded vital signs from the VSDR and the trauma registry value. Significant differences were observed between the highest and lowest heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and pulse oximeter from the VSDR and the trauma registry data (P< .001). Trauma Injury Severity Scores changed in 12 patients (7%) when using data from the VSDR. CONCLUSION Real-time continuous vital signs monitoring and data acquisition can identify dynamic prehospital changes, which may be missed compared with vital signs recorded manually during distinct prehospital intervals. In the future, the use of automated vital signs trending may improve the quality of data reported for inclusion in trauma registries. These data may be used to develop improved triage algorithms aimed at optimizing resource use and enhancing patient outcomes.

Development and Validation of Trauma Surgical Skills Metrics: Preliminary Assessment of Performance after Training

BACKGROUND Maintaining trauma-specific surgical skills is an ongoing challenge for surgical training programs. An objective assessment of surgical skills is needed. We hypothesized that a validated surgical performance assessment tool could detect differences following a training intervention. METHODS We developed surgical performance assessment metrics based on discussion with expert trauma surgeons, video review of 10 experts and 10 novice surgeons performing three vascular exposure procedures and lower extremity fasciotomy on cadavers, and validated the metrics with interrater reliability testing by five reviewers blinded to level of expertise and a consensus conference. We tested these performance metrics in 12 surgical residents (Year 3–7) before and 2 weeks after vascular exposure skills training in the Advanced Surgical Skills for Exposure in Trauma (ASSET) course. Performance was assessed in three areas as follows: knowledge (anatomic, management), procedure steps, and technical skills. Time to completion of procedures was recorded, and these metrics were combined into a single performance score, the Trauma Readiness Index (TRI). Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test compared pretraining/posttraining effects. RESULTS Mean time to complete procedures decreased by 4.3 minutes (from 13.4 minutes to 9.1 minutes). The performance component most improved by the 1-day skills training was procedure steps, completion of which increased by 21%. Technical skill scores improved by 12%. Overall knowledge improved by 3%, with 18% improvement in anatomic knowledge. TRI increased significantly from 50% to 64% with ASSET training. Interrater reliability of the surgical performance assessment metrics was validated with single intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.7 to 0.98. CONCLUSION A trauma-relevant surgical performance assessment detected improvements in specific procedure steps and anatomic knowledge taught during a 1-day course, quantified by the TRI. ASSET training reduced time to complete vascular control by one third. Future applications include assessing specific skills in a larger surgeon cohort, assessing military surgical readiness, and quantifying skill degradation with time since training.

Using an Individual Procedure Score Before and After the Advanced Surgical Skills Exposure for Trauma Course Training to Benchmark a Hemorrhage-Control Performance Metric

OBJECTIVE Test with an individual procedure score (IPS) to assess whether an unpreserved cadaver trauma training course, including upper and lower limb vascular exposure, improves correct identification of surgical landmarks, underlying anatomy, and shortens time to vascular control. DESIGN Prospective study of performance of 3 vascular exposure and control procedures (axillary, brachial, and femoral arteries) using IPS metrics by 2 colocated and trained evaluators before and after training with the Advanced Surgical Skills Exposure for Trauma (ASSET) course. IPS, including identification of anatomical landmarks, incisions, underlying structures, and time to completion of each procedure was compared before and after training using repeated measurement models. SETTING Audio-video instrumented cadaver laboratory at University of Maryland School of Medicine. PARTICIPANTS A total of 41 second to sixth year surgical residents from surgical programs throughout Mid-Atlantic States who had not previously taken the ASSET course were enrolled, 40 completed the pre- and post-ASSET performance evaluations. RESULTS After ASSET training, all components of IPS increased and time shortened for each of the 3 artery exposures. Procedure steps performed correctly increased 57%, anatomical knowledge increased 43% and skin incision to passage of a vessel loop twice around the correct vessel decreased by a mean of 2.5 minutes. An overall vascular trauma readiness index, a comprehensive IPS score for 3 procedures increased 28% with ASSET Training. CONCLUSIONS Improved knowledge of surface landmarks and underlying anatomy is associated with increased IPS, faster procedures, more accurate incision placement, and successful vascular control. Structural recognition during specific procedural steps and anatomical knowledge were key points learned during the ASSET course. Such training may accelerate acquisition of specific trauma surgery skills to compensate for shortened training hours, infrequent exposure to major vascular injuries, or when just-in-time training is necessary. IPS is a benchmark for competence in extremity vascular control.

Time to aortic occlusion: It’s all about access

INTRODUCTION Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a less invasive method of proximal aortic occlusion compared with resuscitative thoracotomy with aortic cross-clamping (RTACC). This study compared time to aortic occlusion with REBOA and RTACC, both including and excluding time required for common femoral artery (CFA) cannulation. METHODS This was a retrospective, single-institution review of REBOA or RTACC performed between February 2013 and January 2016. Time of skin incision to aortic cross-clamp for RTACC, time required for CFA cannulation by percutaneous and open methods, and time from guide-wire insertion to balloon inflation at Zone 1 for REBOA, were obtained from videographic recordings. RESULTS Eighteen RTACC and 21 REBOAs were performed. Median (Q1, Q3) time from skin incision to aortic cross-clamping was 317 seconds (227, 551 seconds). Median (Q1, Q3) time from start of arterial access to Zone 1 balloon occlusion was 474 seconds (431, 572 seconds) (vs. RTACC, p = 0.01). All REBOA procedures were performed with the same device. The median time to complete CFA cannulation was 247 seconds (range, 164–343 seconds), with no difference between percutaneous or open procedures (p = 0.07). The median (Q1, Q3) time to aortic occlusion in REBOA once arterial access had been established was 245 seconds (179, 295.5 seconds), which was significantly shorter than RTACC (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS Once CFA access is achieved, time to aortic occlusion is faster with REBOA. Time to aortic occlusion is less than the time required to cannulate the CFA either by percutaneous or open approaches, emphasizing the importance of accurate and expedient CFA access. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta may represent a feasible alternative to thoracotomy for aortic occlusion. Time to aortic occlusion will likely decrease with the advent of newer REBOA technology. The rate-limiting portion of REBOA continues to be obtaining CFA access. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic, level V.

A primer on how to select osteopathic applicants to an allopathic general surgery residency

As part of Education Week 2009 in Salt Lake City, Utah, the Association of Program Directors in Surgery hosted a panel discussion addressing the integration of osteopathic graduates into allopathic general surgery residency training programs. This article summarizes this panel discussion and the questions asked by members of the audience. With an increasing number of osteopathic medical school graduates, applications to allopathic general surgery residency training programs have been on the rise. Additionally, military scholarships are offered to students at both osteopathic and allopathic schools, increasing the percentage of osteopathic graduates seeking general surgery training in allopathic programs with a military affiliation. The purpose of this work is to provide program directors and faculty members involved with resident selection a primer of information about the expanding role osteopathic physicians, answer potential biases and frequently asked questions about osteopathic applicants and provide practical information on matching osteopathic residents into an allopathic general surgery residency program.

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta: A Bridge to Flight Survival

&NA; Trauma endures as the leading cause of death worldwide, and most deaths occur in the first 24 hours after initial injury as a result of hemorrhage. Historically, about 90% of battlefield deaths occur before the injured person arrives at a theater hospital, and most are due to noncompressible hemorrhage of the torso. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta is an evolving technique to quickly place a balloon into the thoracic or abdominal aorta to efficiently block blood flow to distal circulation. Maneuvers, such as resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta, to control endovascular hemorrhage offer a potential intervention to control noncompressible hemorrhage. This technique can be performed percutaneously or open in prehospital environments to restore hemodynamic functions and serve as a survival bridge until the patient is delivered to a treatment facility for definitive surgical hemostasis. This article describes the indications, complications, and application of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta to military and civilian aeromedical transport. (Critical Care Nurse. 2018;38[2]:69‐75)