William A. Teeter

Smaller introducer sheaths for REBOA may be associated with fewer complications.

Introduction Large arterial sheaths currently used for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) may be associated with severe complications. Smaller diameter catheters compatible with 7Fr sheaths may improve the safety profile. Methods A retrospective review of patients receiving REBOA through a 7Fr sheath for refractory traumatic hemorrhagic shock was performed from January 2014 to June 2015 at five tertiary-care hospitals in Japan. Demographics were collected including method of arterial access; outcomes included mortality and REBOA-related access complications. Results Thirty-three patients underwent REBOA at Zone 1 (level of the diaphragm). Most patients were male (70%), with a mean age (+SD) 50 ± 18 years, mean BMI 23 ± 4, and a median [IQR] ISS of 38 [34, 52]. Ninety-four percent of patients presented after sustaining injuries from blunt mechanisms. Twenty-four percent underwent CPR before arrival, and an additional 15% received CPR after admission. Percutaneous arterial access without ultrasound or fluoroscopy was achieved in all patients. Systolic blood pressure increased significantly following balloon occlusion (mean 62 ± 36 to 106 ± 40 mm Hg, p < 0.001). Median total duration of complete initial occlusion was 26 [range 10–35] minutes. Sixteen patients (49%) survived beyond 24 hours, and 14 patients (42%) survived beyond 30 days. Twenty-four-hour and 30-day survival were 48% and 42%, respectively. Of the patients surviving 24 hours (n = 16), median duration of sheath placement was 28 [range 18–45] hours with all removed using manual pressure to achieve hemostasis. Of 33 REBOAs, 20 were performed by Emergency Medicine practitioners, 10 by Emergency Medicine practitioners with endovascular training, and 3 by Interventional Radiologists. No complication related to sheath insertion or removal was identified during the follow-up period, including dissection, pseudoaneurysm, retroperitoneal hematoma, leg ischemia, or distal embolism. Conclusions 7Fr REBOA catheters can significantly elevate systolic blood pressure with no access-related complications. Our results suggest that a 7Fr introducer device for REBOA may be a safe and effective alternative to large-bore sheaths, and may remain in place during the post-procedure resuscitative phase without sequelae. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/care management, level V.

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.

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.

Trading scalpels for sheaths: Catheter-based treatment of vascular injury can be effectively performed by acute care surgeons trained in endovascular techniques.

BACKGROUND The skill set of the acute care surgeon can be expanded by formal training. We report the first series of traumatic vascular injury (TVI) treated by acute care surgeons trained in endovascular techniques (ACSTEV). METHODS We retrospectively reviewed patients admitted to our trauma center with TVI over 5 months who survived for more than 24 hours and had catheter diagnosis and/or therapy by ACSTEV. Demographics, admission data, and outcomes were reviewed. Follow-up ranged from 0 day to 150 days. RESULTS Most patients were male (63%) and sustained blunt mechanism (91%). Mean (SD) age was 48.2 (21.9) years, and mean (SD) Injury Severity Score was 32.1 (11.8). Mean (SD) admission systolic blood pressure, heart rate, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score were 126.12 (30.4) mm Hg, 101.21 (28.2) beats per minute, and 10.8 (4.73), respectively. Forty-six patients underwent 48 endovascular procedures for TVI: 32 angiograms and 16 venograms were obtained. Two pelvic angiograms and one aortic arch angiogram were negative and required no treatment. One superficial femoral artery arteriogram showed minor luminal defects requiring anticoagulation only. Pseudoaneurysms were found in 17 vessels, vessel truncation in 4, active extravasation in 5, stenosis in 1, and dissection with thrombus in 1. Four patients had resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta performed before catheter intervention for pelvic hemorrhage. Procedures included aortic repair (4), pelvic embolization (13), splenic embolization (5), lumbar artery embolization (1), bronchial artery embolization (1), profunda artery embolization (1), common carotid artery stent (1), celiac artery stent (1), inferior vena cava filter placement (14) and retrieval (2), and pharmacomechanical thrombolysis (1). Treatment material included coils (12), Gelfoam (4), and nitinol plugs (3). No procedural or device-related complications occurred. Mortality was 14.7% unrelated to any endovascular procedure. One patient had repeat coil embolization of a pelvic pseudoaneurysm on postoperative Day 7. CONCLUSION ACSTEV can safely treat TVI with good success. We performed nearly 10 procedures per month underscoring the role of the ACSTEV for training and care of TVI in a high-volume trauma center. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic study, level V.

The Evolution of Care Improves Outcome in Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury: A Western Trauma Association Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND The management of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) has evolved radically in the last decade with changes in the processes of care and the introduction of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). These changes have wrought improved outcome, but the direct effect of TEVAR on outcome remains in question as previous studies have lacked vigorous risk adjustment and long-term follow-up. To address these knowledge gaps, we compared the outcomes of TEVAR, open surgical repair, and nonoperative management for BTAI. METHODS Eight verified trauma centers recruited from the Western Trauma Association Multicenter Study Group retrospectively studied all patients with BTAI admitted between January 1, 2006, and June 30, 2016. Data included demographics, comorbidities, admitting physiology, injury severity, in-hospital care, and outcome. RESULTS We studied 316 patients with BTAI; 57 (18.0%) were in extremis and died before treatment. Of the 259 treated surgically, TEVAR was performed in 176 (68.0%), open in 28 (10.8%), hybrid in 4 (1.5%), and nonoperative in 51 (19.7%). Thoracic endovascular aortic repair and open repair groups had similar Injury Severity Scale score, chest Abbreviated Injury Scale score, Trauma and Injury Severity Score, and probability of survival, but differed in median age (open: 28 [interquartile range {IQR}, 19–51]; TEVAR: 46 [IQR, 28–60]; p < 0.007), zone of aortic injury (p < 0.001), and grade of aortic injury (open: 6 [IQR, 4–6]; TEVAR: 2 [IQR, 2–4]; p < 0.001). The overall in-hospital mortality was 6.6% (TEVAR: 5.7%, open: 10.7%, nonoperative: 3.9%; p = 0.535). Of the 240 patients who survived to discharge, two died (one at 9 months and one at 8 years); both were managed with TEVAR, but the deaths were unrelated to the aortic procedure. Stent graft surveillance computed tomography scans were not obtained in 37.6%. CONCLUSIONS The mortality of BTAI continues to decrease. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair, when anatomically suitable, should be the treatment of choice. Open repair remains necessary for more proximal injuries. Process improvement in computed tomography imaging in follow-up of TEVAR is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/care management, level III.

Long-term outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR): A single institution's 11-year experience.

BACKGROUND Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has largely replaced traditional open aortic repair for anatomically suitable lesions, however, long-term outcomes are unknown. METHODS All patients who underwent TEVAR from December 2004 to October 2015 at a single tertiary care institution were included. Demographics, injury pattern, operative details, outcomes, and surveillance were reviewed. Follow-up ranged from 2 to 132 months and was obtained from clinic notes and imaging reports. RESULTS A total of 88 patients underwent TEVAR; all suffered from blunt mechanisms, 72.7% were men. Median age, Injury Severity Score, and Trauma and Injury Severity Score was 47 (19.7), 38 (13.5), 0. 8 (0.34). Injuries included 2% grade II, 90% grade III, and 8% grade IV. Overall mortality was 6.8%, TEVAR-related mortality was 0%. Overall in-hospital complication rate was 57%, whereas TEVAR-related complication rate was 9.1%: four typ 1a endoleaks, two typ 2, and two typ 3. Of the typ 1 endoleaks, all required reoperation, whereas all types 2 and 3 endoleaks resolved on subsequent imaging. The left subclavian artery (LSCA) was intentionally covered at index operation in 19 patients (21.6%), and 7 patients (8%) had partial LSCA coverage. The rate of postoperative left upper extremity ischemia was 0%. Left carotid-subclavian bypasses were performed prophylactically in two patients before LSCA coverage at index operation. Eighty-seven percent of endograft access was by performed by open femoral artery exposure and one via retroperitoneal conduit. Percutaneous TEVAR (pTEVAR) was performed more recently in 11.4% of patients with no complications. Heparin was administered intraoperatively in 23 patients with TBI, and 12 patients were not heparinized; no adverse events or outcomes resulted from its use or lack thereof. First, second, and third surveillance imagings occurred at mean intervals of 14 days, 4 months, and 1 year, respectively. Percent of patients followed at 1, 3, and 5 years from operation was 62.1%, 25%, 13.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION TEVAR continues to be a feasible treatment modality for blunt traumatic aortic injury with minimal and early device and procedure-specific complications. Follow-up continues to be a significant challenge, and protocols for surveillance imaging are needed. This is the first study to describe access specific outcomes of pTEVAR in trauma patients. Long-term outcomes of TEVAR are still largely unknown; however, these data suggest that it may be at least comparable to open repair. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level IV; therapeutic study, level V.

Can Hyper-realistic Physical Models of Peripheral Vessel Exposure and Fasciotomy Replace Cadavers for Performance Assessment?

BACKGROUND Work-hour restrictions have reduced operative experience for residents. The Advanced Surgical Skills for Exposure in Trauma (ASSET) course fills this training gap. Cadaver use has limitations including cost and availability. Hyper-realistic synthetic models may provide an alternative to cadavers. We compared same surgeon performance between synthetic and cadaveric models to determine interchangeability for formative evaluation. METHODS Forty residents (<4 weeks after ASSET) and 35 faculty (mean, 2.5 ± 1.3 years after ASSET) exposed axillary, brachial, and femoral arteries, and performed lower extremity fasciotomy. Separate evaluators and random starting order between models were used for participants. Individual procedure scores and aggregate procedure scores, a trauma readiness index, evaluated participants. Students t and &khgr;2 tests were used where appropriate. p Values less than 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS For same surgeons, faculty, but not residents, had higher trauma readiness index on the synthetic model (0.63 vs. 0.70, p < 0.01; 0.63 vs. 0.67, p = 0.06, respectively). Scores were not significantly different between models for residents except for the brachial artery exposure (0.68 vs. 0.75, p < 0.01), which was the least realistic of all procedures. Faculty did significantly better on the synthetic model in all procedures. All participants completed procedures nearly twice as quickly (5.61 ± 3.21 vs. 10.08 ± 4.66 minutes) and performed fewer errors on the synthetic model (113 vs. 53, p < 0.01; 118 vs. 76, p = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSION Same surgeons performed procedures quicker and with fewer errors on the synthetic model. Residents performed similarly on both model types, this likely represents the unfamiliarity neophytes bring to new procedures. This suggests that the synthetic model, with easily discernible and standardized anatomy, may be useful in the early stages of training to understand critical procedural steps. The difficulty of the cadaver is more apt to assess and evaluate the experienced surgeon and identify opportunities for improvement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Prognostic, level III.

Assessment of Blood Flow Patterns Distal to Aortic Occlusion using CT in Patients with Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta

BACKGROUND Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is used to decrease hemorrhage below the level of aortic occlusion (AO); however, the amount of collateral blood flow below the level of occlusion is unknown. Our aim was to investigate blood flow patterns during complete AO in patients who underwent CT scan after REBOA. STUDY DESIGN Between February 2013 and January 2017, patients who received REBOA and underwent CT scan with intravenous contrast during full AO were included. Patients were excluded if they had a CT scan performed with the balloon partially or fully deflated. RESULTS Nine patients (8 men) were included; all had blunt trauma. Mean Injury Severity Score (±SD) was 48 ± 8 and mean age was 45 ± 19 years. Four had supra-celiac AO, and 5 had infra-renal AO. Arterial contrast enhancement was noted below the level of AO in all patients, and distal to REBOA sheath placement in 5. Collateralization from arteries above and below the AO was identified in all patients. Contrast extravasation distal to AO was identified in 4 patients, and hematomas in 8. Distal vascular enhancement patterns varied by level of AO and contrast administration site. CONCLUSIONS Aortic occlusion appears to dramatically decrease, but does not completely impede, distal perfusion during REBOA due to multiple pathways of collateralization. Active extravasation and hematomas can still be detected in the setting of full AO, with purposefully timed contrast and image acquisition. Blood flow persists below the level of both the AO and in-dwelling sheath. Dynamic flow studies are needed to determine the contribution of AO and sheath placement to distal tissue ischemia.

Atraumatic splenic rupture cases presenting with hemorrhagic shock and coagulopathy treated by splenic artery occlusion using a microballoon catheter before splenectomy.

Atraumatic splenic rupture (ASR) is an uncommon pathologic condition in which bleeding from the spleen occurs for a variety of nontraumatic reasons. While the current trend in traumatic splenic rupture is nonoperative management including transcatheter arterial embolization, the current recommendation for the treatment of most patients with ASR is splenectomy. In this report, we describe two cases of ASR presenting with hemorrhagic shock and complicated by anticoagulation therapy. In patients with severe hemorrhagic shock and coagulopathy, a damage control strategy is recommended. Our successful treatment of these patients included a three-step strategy as a damage control: (i) rapid transient hemostasis by splenic artery occlusion using a microballoon catheter, (ii) damage control resuscitation and (iii) splenectomy as a definitive hemostatic treatment.