Joshua P. Hazelton

Cervical Spinal Clearance: A Prospective Western Trauma Association Multi-Institutional Trial.

BACKGROUND For blunt trauma patients who have failed the NEXUS (National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study) low-risk criteria, the adequacy of computed tomography (CT) as the definitive imaging modality for clearance remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of CT for the detection of clinically significant cervical spine (C-spine) injury. METHODS This was a prospective multicenter observational study (September 2013 to March 2015) at 18 North American trauma centers. All adult (≥18 years old) blunt trauma patients underwent a structured clinical examination. NEXUS failures underwent a CT of the C-spine with clinical follow-up to discharge. The primary outcome measure was sensitivity and specificity of CT for clinically significant injuries requiring surgical stabilization, halo, or cervical-thoracic orthotic placement using the criterion standard of final diagnosis at the time of discharge, incorporating all imaging and operative findings. RESULTS Ten thousand seven hundred sixty-five patients met inclusion criteria, 489 (4.5%) were excluded (previous spinal instrumentation or outside hospital transfer); 10,276 patients (4,660 [45.3%] unevaluable/distracting injuries, 5,040 [49.0%] midline C-spine tenderness, 576 [5.6%] neurologic symptoms) were prospectively enrolled: mean age, 48.1 years (range, 18–110 years); systolic blood pressure 138 (SD, 26) mm Hg; median, Glasgow Coma Scale score, 15 (IQR, 14–15); Injury Severity Score, 9 (IQR, 4–16). Overall, 198 (1.9%) had a clinically significant C-spine injury requiring surgery (153 [1.5%]) or halo (25 [0.2%]) or cervical-thoracic orthotic placement (20 [0.2%]). The sensitivity and specificity for clinically significant injury were 98.5% and 91.0% with a negative predictive value of 99.97%. There were three (0.03%) false-negative CT scans that missed a clinically significant injury, all had a focal neurologic abnormality on their index clinical examination consistent with central cord syndrome, and two of three scans showed severe degenerative disease. CONCLUSIONS For patients requiring acute imaging for their C-spine after blunt trauma, CT was effective for ruling out clinically significant injury with a sensitivity of 98.5%. For patients with an abnormal neurologic examination as the trigger for imaging, there is a small but clinically significant incidence of a missed injury, and further imaging with magnetic resonance imaging is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic tests, level II.

The impact of a multidisciplinary safety checklist on adverse procedural events during bedside bronchoscopy-guided percutaneous tracheostomy.

BACKGROUND Bedside procedures are seldom subject to the same safety precautions as operating room (OR) procedures. Since July 2013, we have performed a multidisciplinary checklist before all bedside bronchoscopy-guided percutaneous tracheostomy insertions (BPTIs). We hypothesized that the implementation of this checklist before BPTI would decrease adverse procedural events. METHODS A prospective study of all patients who underwent BPTI after checklist implementation (PostCL, 2013–2014, n = 63) at our Level I trauma center were compared to all patients (retrospectively reviewed historical controls) who underwent BPTI without the checklist (PreCL, 2010–2013, n = 184). Exclusion criteria included age less than 16 years, OR, and open tracheostomy. The checklist included both a procedural and timeout component with the trauma technician, respiratory therapist, nurse, and surgeon. Demographics and variables focusing on BPTI risk factors were compared. Variables associated with the primary end point, adverse procedural events, during univariate analysis were used in the multiple variable logistic regression model. A p ⩽ 0.05 was significant. RESULTS Of 247 study sample patients, no difference existed in body mass index, baseline mean arterial pressure, duration or mode of mechanical ventilation, cervical spine or maxillofacial injury, or previous neck surgery between PreCL and PostCL BPTI patients. PreCL patients were younger (48 [20] years vs. 57 [21] years, p < 0.01) but more often had adverse procedural events compared with PostCL patients (PreCL,14.1% vs. PostCL,3.2%, p = 0.020). After adjusting for age, vitals, BPTI risk factors, and intensive care unit duration after BPTI, multiple variable logistic regression determined that performing the safety checklist alone was independently associated with a 580% reduction in adverse procedural events (odds ratio, 5.8; p = 0.022). CONCLUSION Our results suggest that the implementation of a multidisciplinary safety checklist similar to those used in the OR would benefit patients during invasive bedside procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/care management study, level IV.

Evaluation of a Device Combining an Inferior Vena Cava Filter and a Central Venous Catheter for Preventing Pulmonary Embolism Among Critically Ill Trauma Patients

PURPOSE To evaluate efficacy and safety of a novel device that combines an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter and central venous catheter (CVC) for prevention of pulmonary embolism (PE) in critically ill patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS In a multicenter, prospective, single-arm clinical trial, the device was inserted at the bedside without fluoroscopy and subsequently retrieved before transfer from the intensive care unit (ICU). The primary efficacy endpoint was freedom from clinically significant PE or fatal PE 72 hours after device removal or discharge, whichever occurred first. Secondary endpoints were incidence of acute proximal deep venous thrombosis (DVT), catheter-related thrombosis, catheter-related bloodstream infections, major bleeding events, and clinically significant thrombus (occupying > 25% of volume of filter) detected by cavography before retrieval. RESULTS The device was placed in 163 critically ill patients with contraindications to anticoagulation; 151 (93%) were critically ill trauma patients, 129 (85%) had head or spine trauma, and 102 (79%) had intracranial bleeding. The primary efficacy endpoint was achieved for all 163 (100%) patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 97.8%-100%, P < .01). Diagnosis of new or worsening acute proximal DVT was time dependent with 11 (7%) occurring during the first 7 days. There were no (0%) catheter-related bloodstream infections. There were 5 (3.1%) major bleeding events. Significant thrombus in the IVC filter occurred in 14 (8.6%) patients. Prophylactic anticoagulation was not initiated for a mean of 5.5 days ± 4.3 after ICU admission. CONCLUSIONS This novel device prevented clinically significant and fatal PE among critically ill trauma patients with low risk of complications.

Multi-institutional, prospective, observational study comparing the Gastrografin challenge versus standard treatment in adhesive small bowel obstruction

INTRODUCTION Existing trials studying the use of Gastrografin for management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) are limited by methodological flaws and small sample sizes. We compared institutional protocols with and without Gastrografin (GG), hypothesizing that a SBO management protocol utilizing GG is associated with lesser rates of exploration, shorter length of stay, and fewer complications. METHODS A multi-institutional, prospective, observational study was performed on patients appropriate for GG with adhesive SBO. Exclusion criteria were internal/external hernia, signs of strangulation, history of abdominal/pelvic malignancy, or exploration within the past 6 weeks. Patients receiving GG were compared to patients receiving standard care without GG. RESULTS Overall, 316 patients were included (58 ± 18 years; 53% male). There were 173 (55%) patients in the GG group (of whom 118 [75%] successfully passed) and 143 patients in the non-GG group. There were no differences in duration of obstipation (1.6 vs. 1.9 days, p = 0.77) or small bowel feces sign (32.9% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.14). Fewer patients in the GG protocol cohort had mesenteric edema on CT (16.3% vs. 29.9%; p = 0.009). There was a lower rate of bowel resection (6.9% vs. 21.0%, p < 0.001) and exploration rate in the GG group (20.8% vs. 44.1%, p < 0.0001). GG patients had a shorter duration of hospital stay (4 IQR 2–7 vs. 5 days IQR 2–12; p = 0.036) and a similar rate of complications (12.5% vs. 17.9%; p = 0.20). Multivariable analysis revealed that GG was independently associated with successful nonoperative management. CONCLUSION Patients receiving Gastrografin for adhesive SBO had lower rates of exploration and shorter hospital length of stay compared to patients who did not receive GG. Adequately powered and well-designed randomized trials are required to confirm these findings and establish causality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic, level III.

Venous thromboembolism after major venous injuries: Competing priorities

BACKGROUND Venous thromboembolism (VTE) after major vascular injury (MVI) is particularly challenging because the competing risk of thrombosis and embolization after direct vessel injury must be balanced with risk of bleeding after surgical repair. We hypothesized that venous injuries, repair type, and intraoperative anticoagulation would influence VTE formation after MVI. METHODS A multi-institution, retrospective cohort study of consecutive MVI patients was conducted at three urban, Level I centers (2005–2013). Patients with MVI of the neck, torso, or proximal extremities (to elbows/knees) were included. Our primary study endpoint was the development of VTE (DVT or pulmonary embolism [PE]). RESULTS The 435 major vascular injury patients were primarily young (27 years) men (89%) with penetrating (84%) injuries. When patients with (n = 108) and without (n = 327) VTE were compared, we observed no difference in age, mechanism, extremity injury, tourniquet use, orthopedic and spine injuries, damage control, local heparinized saline, or vascular surgery consultation (all p > 0.05). VTE patients had greater Injury Severity Score (ISS) (17 vs. 12), shock indices (1 vs. 0.9), and more torso (58% vs. 35%) and venous (73% vs. 48%) injuries, but less often received systemic intraoperative anticoagulation (39% vs. 53%) or postoperative enoxaparin (47% vs. 61%) prophylaxis (all p < 0.05). After controlling for ISS, hemodynamics, injured vessel, intraoperative anticoagulation, and postoperative prophylaxis, multivariable analysis revealed venous injury was independently predictive of VTE (odds ratio, 2.7; p = 0.002). Multivariable analysis of the venous injuries subset (n = 237) then determined that only delay in starting VTE chemoprophylaxis (odds ratio, 1.3/day; p = 0.013) independently predicted VTE after controlling for ISS, hemodynamics, injured vessel, surgical subspecialty, intraoperative anticoagulation, and postoperative prophylaxis. Overall, 3.4% of venous injury patients developed PE, but PE rates were not related to their operative management (p = 0.72). CONCLUSION Patients with major venous injuries are at high risk for VTE, regardless of intraoperative management. Our results support the immediate initiation of postoperative chemoprophylaxis in patients with major venous injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/care management, level IV.

Comparison of atriocaval shunting with perihepatic packing versus perihepatic packing alone for retrohepatic vena cava injuries in a swine model

BACKGROUND Retrohepatic vena cava (RVC) injuries are technically challenging and often lethal. Atriocaval shunting has been promoted as a modality to control haemorrhage from these injuries, but evidence from controlled studies supporting its benefit is lacking. We hypothesised that addition of an atriocaval shunt to perihepatic packing would improve outcomes in our penetrating RVC injury swine model. METHODS After a survivable atriocaval shunting model was refined in 4 swine without an injury, 13 additional female Yorkshire swine were randomised into either perihepatic packing and atriocaval shunt (PPAS, n=7) or perihepatic packing alone (PP, n=6) treatment arms prior to creating a standardised, 1.5 cm stab wound to the RVC. Haemodynamic parameters, intravenous fluid, and blood loss were recorded until mortality or euthanisation after 4h. Statistical tests used to test differences include the Wilcoxon rank sums test, Fisher exact test and analysis of covariance. A p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS Immediately before and after RVC injury, no difference in temperature, cardiac output, heart rate, mean arterial pressure or mean pulmonary artery pressure was detected (all p>0.05) between the two groups. While the RVC injury did affect measures parameters in PPAS swine over time, haemodynamic compromise and blood loss were not significantly greater in PPAS than PP swine. Survival time was significantly different with all PPAS swine dying within 2h (mean survival duration 39 (SD 58)min) while all 6 PP swine survived the entire 4h study period. CONCLUSIONS While perihepatic packing alone slowed haemorrhage to survivable rates during the 4h study period, atriocaval shunt placement led to rapid physiologic decline and death in our standardised, penetrating RVC model.

Results of a prospective, randomized, controlled study of the use of carboxymethylcellulose sodium hyaluronate adhesion barrier in trauma open abdomens.

INTRODUCTION The open abdominal (OA) approach is a management strategy used in the most severely injured trauma patients. In addition to the morbidity and mortality, a major challenge is the gradual development of dense adhesions that make reoperations progressively more difficult. This randomized, prospective, proof-of-concept study was conducted to determine the effect of carboxymethylcellulose sodium hyaluronate adhesion barrier (CMHAB; Seprafilm, Genzyme Biosurgery, Bridgewater, NJ) on abdominal adhesions and wound characteristics in trauma open abdomens. METHODS A prospective, randomized, controlled study of wound and adhesion characteristics with or without CMHAB was conducted at 5 level I trauma centers. Consenting patients were randomized to either CMHAB or no adhesion barrier (NAB) groups. We evaluated patient demographics, injury characteristics/severity, reason for OA management, wound sizes (transverse/longitudinal), Zuhlke adhesion score, abdominal contamination score, hospital/intensive care durations of stay, morbidity, and mortality. RESULTS Thirty patients were enrolled (17 randomized to CMHAB; 13 randomized to NAB) with mean age of 40.3, Injury Severity Score of 30, Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS)-abdomen of 3.68, APACHE II score of 14.4, and 67% blunt trauma mechanism. The groups were well-matched with regard to age, sex, Injury Severity Score/abdominal AIS, penetrating/blunt injury rates, initial lactate/base deficit, mortality, OA indications, and contamination scores. There were no differences in nonabdominal or abdominal complications (ie, fistula, abscess, wound related) between the groups. Patients with CMHAB had shorter intensive care unit durations of stay (15 vs 22 days; P < .05). Intraoperative adhesion scores were not different during the first four operations but diverged significantly at the 5th operative intervention or after about 1 week of OA therapy. After the 5th operation, adhesion scores in the NAB group were 67% greater (approximately 1 Zuhlke point) than the CMHAB group. We did not note differences between wound sizes over time, closure types, or wound closure characteristics between CMHAB and NAB. CONCLUSION Although CMHAB did not eliminate adhesions in this proof-of-concept study, it limited their severity, particularly in abdomens left open >9 days or requiring ≥5 operations. There was no difference in wound sizes, overall or abdominal complications, or mortality between the groups. Further research is warranted to better delineate potential benefits of CMHAB, especially in the setting of reoperations in post-OA patients.

Systemic intraoperative anticoagulation during arterial injury repair: Implications for patency and bleeding.

BACKGROUND The role of systemic intraoperative anticoagulation (SIAC) during surgical repair of major arterial injuries is controversial. Any potential improvement in arterial patency must be weighed against the risk of hemorrhage in these critically injured patients. We hypothesized that SIAC would increase arterial patency without increasing bleeding complications. METHODS We conducted a multi-institution, retrospective cohort study of trauma patients with major vascular injury from 2005 to 2013 in three Level I centers. Arterial injuries of the neck, torso, and proximal extremities requiring operative management were included. Our primary endpoint was maintenance of arterial patency during index hospitalization. Complications related to bleeding were assessed. The association between SIAC and arterial patency was evaluated using chi-square, t test, and multiple logistic regression modeling. RESULTS Of 323 study patients, most were male (88%) and injured by gunshot wounds (69%). Patients repaired with SIAC (n = 154) were compared to those repaired without SIAC (n = 169). No difference in age, gender, mechanism, admission heart rate, or concomitant injury was detected between the groups (all p > 0.05). SIAC use was associated with greater arterial patency rates (93% vs. 85%, p = 0.02) without increasing return to OR for bleeding (4% vs. 6%, p = 0.29). After controlling for gender, admission hemodynamics, ISS, injury location, and postoperative anticoagulation, multivariable regression determined that SIAC patients were 2.6 times more likely (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1–6.2, p = 0.03) to maintain patency. Patients who maintained arterial patency were then less likely to return to the OR (9% vs. 78%, p < 0.001) with shorter intensive care unit (median 3 vs. 9 days, p < 0.01) and hospital length of stay (median 13 vs. 21 days, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION Patients who underwent operative repair of arterial injuries utilizing SIAC experienced better arterial patency without additional bleeding complications as compared to those repaired without SIAC. Our data suggest that SIAC may improve arterial patency rates after repair and the attributable bleeding risk of SIAC may be overstated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/care management, level IV.

The expedited discharge of patients with multiple traumatic rib fractures is cost-effective

INTRODUCTION Rib fractures are a cause of significant morbidity and mortality in trauma patients. It is well documented that optimizing pain control, mobilization, and respiratory care decreases complications. However, the impact of these interventions on hospital costs and length of stay is not well defined. We hypothesized patients with multiple rib fractures can be discharged within three hospital days resulting in decreased hospital costs. METHODS A retrospective review of adult patients (≥18yrs) admitted to our Level 1 trauma center (2011-2013) with ≥2 rib fractures was performed. Patients were excluded if they were intubated, admitted to the ICU, required chest tube placement, or sustained significant multi-system trauma. (n = 202) Demographics, clinical characteristics, hospital costs, and outcome data were analyzed. Patients discharged within three hospital days of admission were considered to have achieved expedited discharge (ED). Univariate and multivariate analyses determined predictors of failure to achieve ED. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS Study patients (n = 202) were 60 (SD = 19) years of age with an injury severity score (ISS) of 10 (SD = 5), and 4 (SD = 2) rib fractures. Of 202 patients, 127 (63%) achieved ED while 75 (37%) did not. No differences in chest AIS, ISS, smoking status or history of pulmonary disease were identified between the two groups (all p > 0.05). Average LOS (2 (SD = 1) vs. 7 (SD = 4) days; p < 0.001) and hospital costs (

Added Value of Dedicated Spine CT to Detect Fracture in Patients with CT Chest, Abdomen, and Pelvis in the Trauma Setting

2865 (SD = 1200) vs.