The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2019
The effectiveness of junctional tourniquets: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Smith Shane, White John, Wanis Kerollos Nashat, Beckett Andrew, McAlister Vivian C, Hilsden Richard
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Junctional tourniquets have been incorporated into tactical combat casualty care for junctional vascular trauma. They apply external compression to stop blood flow in the groin and axilla.
OBJECTIVES: The primary outcome was effectiveness in achieving arterial occlusion. Secondary outcomes included time to application and pain scores.
DATA SOURCES: Medline and EMBASE databases were searched.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the average effectiveness and time to effective application for each device.
RESULTS: Eight studies reported the effectiveness of junctional tourniquets in healthy volunteers. The average effectiveness was 52% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15-87%) for the abdominal application of the abdominal aortic and junctional tourniquet (AAJT), 83% (95% CI, 73-89%; 26%) for the junctional Emergency Treatment Tool, 87% (95% CI, 79-92%; 15%) for the SAM junctional tourniquet (SJT), and 95% (95% CI, 90-98%) for the Combat Ready Clamp. The groin application of the AAJT was studied in two articles with 100% in both studies. The average time to application was 101 seconds for the SAM junctional tourniquet (95% CI, 50-152 seconds) and the Combat Ready Clamp (95% CI, 63-139 seconds), while it was 130 seconds (95% CI, 85-176 seconds) for the Junctional Emergency Treatment Tool. The abdominal application of AAJT had an average time to application of 92 and 171 seconds in two studies.
LIMITATIONS: All studies were conducted in healthy volunteers.
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Junctional tourniquets may meet a medical need in combat, and in the civilian environment, to control hemorrhage from these difficult injuries. All four Food and Drug Administration-approved devices demonstrate the ability to achieve vascular occlusion in healthy volunteers; however, effectiveness in patient transport has not been evaluated, and outcomes of their use in the field need to be captured and reported.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, level III.
OBJECTIVES: The primary outcome was effectiveness in achieving arterial occlusion. Secondary outcomes included time to application and pain scores.
DATA SOURCES: Medline and EMBASE databases were searched.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the average effectiveness and time to effective application for each device.
RESULTS: Eight studies reported the effectiveness of junctional tourniquets in healthy volunteers. The average effectiveness was 52% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15-87%) for the abdominal application of the abdominal aortic and junctional tourniquet (AAJT), 83% (95% CI, 73-89%; 26%) for the junctional Emergency Treatment Tool, 87% (95% CI, 79-92%; 15%) for the SAM junctional tourniquet (SJT), and 95% (95% CI, 90-98%) for the Combat Ready Clamp. The groin application of the AAJT was studied in two articles with 100% in both studies. The average time to application was 101 seconds for the SAM junctional tourniquet (95% CI, 50-152 seconds) and the Combat Ready Clamp (95% CI, 63-139 seconds), while it was 130 seconds (95% CI, 85-176 seconds) for the Junctional Emergency Treatment Tool. The abdominal application of AAJT had an average time to application of 92 and 171 seconds in two studies.
LIMITATIONS: All studies were conducted in healthy volunteers.
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Junctional tourniquets may meet a medical need in combat, and in the civilian environment, to control hemorrhage from these difficult injuries. All four Food and Drug Administration-approved devices demonstrate the ability to achieve vascular occlusion in healthy volunteers; however, effectiveness in patient transport has not been evaluated, and outcomes of their use in the field need to be captured and reported.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, level III.