Peter Rhee

Survival after emergency department thoracotomy: review of published data from the past 25 years.

BACKGROUND Emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) has become standard therapy for patients who acutely arrest after injury. Patient selection is vitally important to achieve optimal outcomes without wasting valuable resources. The aim of this study was to determine the main factors that most influence survival after EDT. STUDY DESIGN Twenty-four studies that included 4,620 cases from institutions that reported EDT for both blunt and penetrating trauma during the past 25 years were reviewed. The primary outcomes analyzed were in-hospital survival rates. RESULTS EDT had an overall survival rate of 7.4%. Normal neurologic outcomes were noted in 92.4% of surviving patients. Factors reported as influencing outcomes were the mechanism of injury (MOI), location of major injury (LOMI), and signs of life (SOL). Survival rates for MOI were 8.8% for penetrating injuries and 1.4% for blunt injuries. When penetrating injuries were further separated, the survival rates were 16.8% for stab wounds and 4.3% for gunshot wounds. For the LOMI, survival rates were 10.7% for thoracic injuries, 4.5% for abdominal injuries, and 0.7% for multiple injuries. If the LOMI was the heart, the survival rate was the highest at 19.4%. The third factor influencing outcomes was SOL. If SOL were present on arrival at the hospital, survival rate was 11.5% in contrast to 2.6% if none were present. SOL present during transport resulted in a survival rate of 8.9%. Absence of SOL in the field yielded a survival rate of 1.2%. There was no clear single independent preoperative factor that could uniformly predict death. CONCLUSIONS The best survival results are seen in patients who undergo EDT for thoracic stab injuries and who arrive with SOL in the emergency department. All three factors-MOI, LOMI, and SOL-should be taken into account when deciding whether to perform EDT. Uniform reporting guidelines are needed to further elucidate the role of EDT taking into account the combination of MOI, LOMI, and SOL.

Preventing renal failure in patients with rhabdomyolysis: do bicarbonate and mannitol make a difference?

BACKGROUND The combination of bicarbonate and mannitol (BIC/MAN) is commonly used to prevent renal failure (RF) in patients with rhabdomyolysis despite the absence of sufficient evidence validating its use. The purpose of this study was to determine whether BIC/ MAN is effective in preventing RF in patients with rhabdomyolysis caused by trauma. METHODS This study was a review of all adult trauma intensive care unit (ICU) admissions over 5 years (January 1997-September 2002). Creatine kinase (CK) levels were checked daily (abnormal,>520 U/L). RF was defined as a creatinine greater than 2.0 mg/dL. Patients received BIC/MAN on the basis of the surgeons discretion. RESULTS Among 2,083 trauma ICU admissions, 85% had abnormal CK levels. Overall, RF occurred in 10% of trauma ICU patients. A CK level of 5,000 U/L was the lowest abnormal level associated with RF; 74 of 382 (19%) patients with CK greater than 5,000 U/L developed RF as compared with 143 of 1,701 (8%) patients with CK less than 5,000 U/L (p < 0.0001). Among patients with CK greater than 5,000 U/L, there was no difference in the rates of RF, dialysis, or mortality between those who received BIC/MAN and those who did not. Subanalysis of groups with various levels of CK still failed to show any benefit of BIC/MAN. CONCLUSION Abnormal CK levels are common among critically injured patients, and a CK level greater than 5,000 U/L is associated with RF. BIC/MAN does not prevent RF, dialysis, or mortality in patients with creatine kinase levels greater than 5,000 U/L. The standard of administering BIC/MAN to patients with post-traumatic rhabdomyolysis should be reevaluated.

Preventable or potentially preventable mortality at a mature trauma center.

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to analyze the preventable and potentially preventable deaths occurring at a mature Level I trauma center. METHODS All trauma patients that died during their initial hospital admission during an 8-year period (January, 1998 to December, 2005) were analyzed. The deaths were initially reviewed at a weekly Morbidity and Mortality (M&M) conference followed by a multidisciplinary (Trauma Surgery, Critical Care, Emergency Medicine, Neurosurgery, Nursing, and Coroner) Combined Trauma Death Review Committee, and were classified into nonpreventable, potentially preventable, and preventable deaths. All preventable and potentially preventable deaths were identified for the purpose of the study. Quality improvement death forms included data on epidemiology, vital signs, injury severity, type of injury, probability of survival with Trauma and Injury Severity Score methodology, preventability (nonpreventable, potentially preventable, and preventable deaths), errors in the evaluation and management of the patient, and classification of errors (system, judgment, knowledge). Additional injury details, clinical course, circumstances leading to the death and autopsy findings were abstracted from the trauma registry and individual chart review. RESULTS During the study period, 35,311 patients meeting trauma registry criteria were admitted and a total of 2,081 (5.9%) deaths occurred. Fifty-one deaths were classified as preventable or potentially preventable deaths (0.1% of admissions, 2.5% of deaths). Eleven of them (0.53% of deaths) were classified as preventable and 40 (1.92% of deaths) as potentially preventable deaths. Mean age was 40 years, 66.7% were men, mean Injury Severity Score was 27, 74.5% were blunt. The most common cause of death was bleeding (20, 39.2%) followed by multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (14, 27.5%) and cardiorespiratory arrest (8, 15.6%). This was caused by a delay in treatment (27, 52.9%), clinical judgment error (11, 21.6%), missed diagnosis (6, 11.8%), technical error (4, 7.8%), and other (3, 5.9%). The deaths peaked at two time periods: 26 (51.1%) during the first 24 hours and 16 (31.4%) after 7 days. Only one patient (2.0%) died in the first hour. The most common location of death was the intensive care unit (28, 54.9%), operating room (13, 25.5%), and emergency room (5, 9.8%). CONCLUSION Preventable or potentially preventable deaths are rare but do occur at an academic Level I trauma center. Delay in treatment and error in judgment are the leading causes of preventable and potentially preventable deaths.

The effect of trauma center designation and trauma volume on outcome in specific severe injuries.

Objective:The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of American College of Surgeons (ACS) trauma center designation and trauma volume on outcome in patients with specific severe injuries. Background:Trauma centers are designated by the ACS into different levels on the basis of resources, trauma volume, and educational and research commitment. The criteria for trauma center designation are arbitrary and have never been validated. Methods:The National Trauma Data Bank study, which included patients >14 years of age and had injury severity score (ISS) >15, were alive on admission and had at least one of the following severe injuries: aortic, vena cava, iliac vessels, cardiac, grade IV/V liver injuries, quadriplegia, or complex pelvic fractures. Outcomes (mortality, intensive care unit stay, and severe disability at discharge) were compared among level I and II trauma centers and between centers within the same level designation but different volumes of severe trauma (<240 vs ≥240 trauma admissions with ISS >15 per year). The outcomes were adjusted for age (<65 ≥65), gender, mechanism of injury, hypotension on admission, and ISS (≤25 and >25). Results:A total of 12,254 patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall, level I centers had significantly lower mortality (25.3% vs 29.3%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71–0.94; P = 0.004) and significantly lower severe disability at discharge (20.3% vs 33.8%, adjusted OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.44–0.69; P < 0.001) than level II centers. Subgroup analysis showed that cardiovascular injuries (N = 2004) and grades IV–V liver injuries (N = 1415) had a significantly better survival in level I than level II trauma centers (adjusted P = 0.017 and 0.023, respectively). Overall, there was a significantly better functional outcome in level I centers (adjusted P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed level I centers had significantly better functional outcomes in complex pelvic fractures (P < 0.001) and a trend toward better outcomes in the rest of the subgroups. The volume of trauma admissions with ISS >15 (<240 vs ≥240 cases per year) had no effect on outcome in either level I or II centers. Conclusions:Level I trauma centers have better outcomes than lower-level centers in patients with specific injuries associated with high mortality and poor functional outcomes. The volume of major trauma admissions does not influence outcome in either level I or II centers. These findings may have significant implications in the planning of trauma systems and the billing of services according to level of accreditation.

Human neutrophil activation and increased adhesion by various resuscitation fluids

Objective: To determine whether activated neutrophils play a major role in secondary tissue injury after resuscitation in trauma. We hypothesized that human neutrophil activation and adhesion vary, depending on the type and amount of resuscitation fluid used. Setting: University‐based research facility. Subjects: Ten healthy adult volunteers. Design: Whole blood from volunteers was serially diluted in polypropylene tubes with various resuscitation fluids. Fluids tested were phosphate‐buffered saline, normal saline, lactated Ringers solution, dextran, hespan, 5% human albumin, 25% human albumin, 3.5% hypertonic saline, and 7.5% hypertonic saline. Neutrophil activation (intracellular oxidative burst activity with dichlorofluorescin diacetate staining) and adhesion (integrin cell surface expression of CD18) were measured with flow cytometry (fluorescence‐activated cell sorting). Blood was diluted with hypertonic saline by controlling for sodium content equal to normal saline. Measurements and Main Results: There was a significant dose‐related increase in neutrophil oxidative burst activity as the result of dilution followed with crystalloid fluids and artificial colloids (dextran and hespan). The increase was 12‐18 × baseline at the 75% dilution. The increase with 5% human albumin was only 2.2 × baseline, and 25% albumin did not demonstrate any increased intracellular activity. A similar significant increase in the neutrophil adhesion expression (CD18) occurred with artificial colloids (p < .05) and, to a lesser extent, with crystalloids, but not with albumin. Hypertonic saline caused a decrease in CD18 cell surface expression. Conclusions: This study suggests that the neutrophil activation and adhesion may vary, depending on the type of resuscitative fluid used. All artificial resuscitative fluids may not be similar or innocuous, as demonstrated by the dose‐related increase in neutrophil activation and adhesion.

Lactated Ringer's solution resuscitation causes neutrophil activation after hemorrhagic shock

PURPOSE To determine the degree of neutrophil activation caused by hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation. METHODS Awake swine underwent 15-minute 40% blood volume hemorrhage, and a 1-hour shock period, followed by resuscitation with: group I, lactated Ringers solution (LR); group II, shed blood; and group III, 7.5% hypertonic saline (HTS). Group IV underwent sham hemorrhage and LR infusion. Neutrophil activation was measured in whole blood using flow cytometry to detect intracellular superoxide burst activity. RESULTS Neutrophil activation increased significantly immediately after hemorrhage, but it was greatest after resuscitation with LR (group I, 273 vs. 102%; p < 0.05). Animals that received shed blood (group II) and HTS (group III) had neutrophil activity return to baseline state after resuscitation. Group IV animals had an increase in neutrophil activation (259 vs. 129%; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION Neutrophil activation occurring after LR resuscitation and LR infusion without hemorrhage, but not after resuscitation with shed blood or HTS, suggests that the neutrophil activation may be caused by LR and not by reperfusion.

Selective Nonoperative Management of Penetrating Abdominal Solid Organ Injuries

Objective:To assess the feasibility and safety of selective nonoperative management in penetrating abdominal solid organ injuries. Background:Nonoperative management of blunt abdominal solid organ injuries has become the standard of care. However, routine surgical exploration remains the standard practice for all penetrating solid organ injuries. The present study examines the role of nonoperative management in selected patients with penetrating injuries to abdominal solid organs. Patients and Methods:Prospective, protocol-driven study, which included all penetrating abdominal solid organ (liver, spleen, kidney) injuries admitted to a level I trauma center, over a 20-month period. Patients with hemodynamic instability, peritonitis, or an unevaluable abdomen underwent an immediate laparotomy. Patients who were hemodynamically stable and had no signs of peritonitis were selected for further CT scan evaluation. In the absence of CT scan findings suggestive of hollow viscus injury, the patients were observed with serial clinical examinations, hemoglobin levels, and white cell counts. Patients with left thoracoabdominal injuries underwent elective laparoscopy to rule out diaphragmatic injury. Outcome parameters included survival, complications, need for delayed laparotomy in observed patients, and length of hospital stay. Results:During the study period, there were 152 patients with 185 penetrating solid organ injuries. Gunshot wounds accounted for 70.4% and stab wounds for 29.6% of injuries. Ninety-one patients (59.9%) met the criteria for immediate operation. The remaining 61 (40.1%) patients were selected for CT scan evaluation. Forty-three patients (28.3% of all patients) with 47 solid organ injuries who had no CT scan findings suspicious of hollow viscus injury were selected for clinical observation and additional laparoscopy in 2. Four patients with a “blush” on CT scan underwent angiographic embolization of the liver. Overall, 41 patients (27.0%), including 18 cases with grade III to V injuries, were successfully managed without a laparotomy and without any abdominal complication. Overall, 28.4% of all liver, 14.9% of kidney, and 3.5% of splenic injuries were successfully managed nonoperatively. Patients with isolated solid organ injuries treated nonoperatively had a significantly shorter hospital stay than patients treated operatively, even though the former group had more severe injuries. In 3 patients with failed nonoperative management and delayed laparotomy, there were no complications. Conclusions:In the appropriate environment, selective nonoperative management of penetrating abdominal solid organ injuries has a high success rate and a low complication rate.

Application of a zeolite hemostatic agent achieves 100% survival in a lethal model of complex groin injury in swine

BACKGROUND Techniques for better hemorrhage control after injury could change outcome. We have previously shown that a zeolite mineral hemostatic agent (ZH) can control aggressive bleeding through adsorption of water, which is an exothermic process. Increasing the residual moisture content (RM) of ZH can theoretically decrease heat generation, but its effect on the hemostatic properties is unknown. We tested ZH with increasing RM against controls and other hemostatic agents in a swine model of battlefield injury. METHODS A complex groin injury was created in 72 swine (37 +/- 0.8 kg). This included semitransection of the proximal thigh and complete division of the femoral artery and vein. After 3 minutes, the animals were randomized to 1 of 10 groups: group 1, no dressing (ND); group 2, standard dressing (SD); group 3, SD + 3.5 oz ZH with 1% RM (1% ZH); group 4, SD + 3.5 oz ZH with 4% RM (4% ZH); group 5, SD + 2 oz ZH with 1% RM (1% ZH 2oz); group 6, SD + 3.5 oz ZH with 8% RM (8% ZH); group 7, SD + chitosan-based hemostat, HemCon (HC); group 8, SD + 3.5 oz nonzeolite mineral hemostat, Quick Relief (NZH); group 9, SD + bovine clotting factors-based hemostat, Fast Act (FA); and group 10, SD + 30 g of starch-based hemostat, TraumaDex (TDex). Resuscitation (500 mL of Hespan over 30 minutes) was started 15 minutes after injury and hemodynamic monitoring was performed for 180 minutes. Primary endpoints were survival for 180 minutes and blood loss. In addition, maximum wound temperatures were recorded, and histologic damage to artery, vein, nerve, and muscle was documented. RESULTS Use of 1% ZH decreased blood loss and reduced mortality to 0% (p < 0.05). Increasing the RM adversely affected efficacy without any significant decrease in wound temperatures. Minimal histologic tissue damage was seen with ZH independent of the percentage of RM. CONCLUSION The use of zeolite hemostatic agent (1% residual moisture, 3.5 oz) can control hemorrhage and dramatically reduce mortality from a lethal groin wound.

Hemorrhage control in the battlefield: Role of new hemostatic agents

Uncontrolled hemorrhage is the leading cause of preventable combat-related deaths. The vast majority of these deaths occur in the field before the injured can be transported to a treatment facility. Early control of hemorrhage remains the most effective strategy for treating combat casualties. A number of hemostatic agents have recently been deployed to the warfront that can be used to arrest bleeding before surgical control of the source. The purpose of this article is to summarize the background information regarding these hemostatic agents, indications and rationale for their use, and characteristics of these products that may impact effectiveness.

Impact of Plasma Transfusion in Trauma Patients Who Do Not Require Massive Transfusion

BACKGROUND For trauma patients requiring massive blood transfusion, aggressive plasma usage has been demonstrated to confer a survival advantage. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of plasma administration in nonmassively transfused patients. STUDY DESIGN Trauma patients admitted to a Level I trauma center (2000-2005) requiring a nonmassive transfusion (<10 U packed RBC [PRBC] within 12 hours of admission) were identified retrospectively. Propensity scores were calculated to match and compare patients receiving plasma in the first 12 hours with those who did not. RESULTS The 1,716 patients (86.1% of 1,933 who received PRBC transfusion) received a nonmassive transfusion. After exclusion of 31 (1.8%) early deaths, 284 patients receiving plasma were matched to patients who did not. There was no improvement in survival with plasma transfusion (17.3% versus 14.1%; p = 0.30) irrespective of the plasma-to-PRBC ratio achieved. However, the overall complication rate was significantly higher for patients receiving plasma (26.8% versus 18.3%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4; p = 0.016). As the volume of plasma increased, an increase in complications was seen, reaching 37.5% for patients receiving >6 U. The ARDS rate specifically was also significantly higher in patients receiving plasma (9.9% versus 3.5%, OR = 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.2; p = 0.004]. Patients receiving >6 U plasma had a 12-fold increase in ARDS, a 6-fold increase in multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and a 4-fold increase in pneumonia and sepsis. CONCLUSIONS For nonmassively transfused trauma patients, plasma administration was associated with a substantial increase in complications, in particular ARDS, with no improvement in survival. An increase in multiple organ dysfunction, pneumonia, and sepsis was likewise seen as increasing volumes of plasma were transfused. The optimal trigger for initiation of a protocol for aggressive plasma infusion warrants prospective evaluation.