Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2022
Effectiveness of protocolized management for patients sustaining maxillofacial fracture with massive oronasal bleeding: a single-center experience.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Wu Fang-Chi, Hung Kuo-Shu, Lin Yu-Wen, Sung Kang, Yang Tsung-Han, Wu Chun-Hsien, Wang Chih-Jung, Yen Yi-Ting
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Maxillofacial fractures can lead to massive oronasal bleeding; however, surgical hemostasis and packing procedures can be challenging owing to complex facial anatomy. Only a few studies investigated maxillofacial fractures with massive oronasal hemorrhage. However, thus far, no studies have reported a protocolized management approach for maxillofacial trauma from a single center. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of protocolized management for maxillofacial fractures with oronasal bleeding.
METHODS: Patients were identified from the National Cheng University Hospital trauma registry from 2010 to 2020. We included patients with a face Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score of > 3 and active oronasal bleeding. Patients' characteristics were compared between the angiography and non-angiography groups and between survivors and nonsurvivors.
RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were included. Among them, 34 (69%) underwent angiography, of whom 21 received arterial embolization. Forty-seven patients (96%) successfully achieved hemostasis by adhering to the treatment protocol at our institution. Compared with the non-angiography group, the angiography group had significantly more patients requiring oral intubation (97% vs. 53%, P < 0.001), Glasgow Coma Scale < 9 (GCS; 79% vs. 27%, P < 0.001), head AIS > 3 (65% vs. 13%, P = 0.001), higher Injury Severity Score (ISS; 43 [33-50] vs. 22 [18-27], P < 0.001), higher incidence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR; 41% vs. 0%, P = 0.002), higher mortality rate (35% vs. 7%, P = 0.043), and more units of packed red blood cells (PRBC) transfused within 24 h (12 [6-20] vs. 2 [0-4], P < 0.001). The nonsurvivor group had significantly more patients with hypotension (62% vs. 8%; P < 0.001), higher need for CPR (85% vs. 8%; P < 0.001), head AIS > 3 (92% vs. 33%; P < 0.001), skull base fracture (100% vs. 64%; P = 0.011), GCS score < 9 (100% vs. 50%; P = 0.003), higher ISS (50 [43-57] vs. 29 [19-48]; P < 0.001), and more units of PRBC transfused within 24 h (18 [13-22] vs. 6 [2-12]; P = 0.001) than the survivor group. More patients underwent angiography in the nonsurvivor group than in the survivor group (92% vs. 61%; P = 0.043). Among embolized vessels, the internal maxillary artery (65%) was the most common bleeding site. Hypoxic encephalopathy accounted for 92% of deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: Protocol-guided management effectively optimizes outcomes in patients with maxillofacial bleeding.
METHODS: Patients were identified from the National Cheng University Hospital trauma registry from 2010 to 2020. We included patients with a face Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score of > 3 and active oronasal bleeding. Patients' characteristics were compared between the angiography and non-angiography groups and between survivors and nonsurvivors.
RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were included. Among them, 34 (69%) underwent angiography, of whom 21 received arterial embolization. Forty-seven patients (96%) successfully achieved hemostasis by adhering to the treatment protocol at our institution. Compared with the non-angiography group, the angiography group had significantly more patients requiring oral intubation (97% vs. 53%, P < 0.001), Glasgow Coma Scale < 9 (GCS; 79% vs. 27%, P < 0.001), head AIS > 3 (65% vs. 13%, P = 0.001), higher Injury Severity Score (ISS; 43 [33-50] vs. 22 [18-27], P < 0.001), higher incidence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR; 41% vs. 0%, P = 0.002), higher mortality rate (35% vs. 7%, P = 0.043), and more units of packed red blood cells (PRBC) transfused within 24 h (12 [6-20] vs. 2 [0-4], P < 0.001). The nonsurvivor group had significantly more patients with hypotension (62% vs. 8%; P < 0.001), higher need for CPR (85% vs. 8%; P < 0.001), head AIS > 3 (92% vs. 33%; P < 0.001), skull base fracture (100% vs. 64%; P = 0.011), GCS score < 9 (100% vs. 50%; P = 0.003), higher ISS (50 [43-57] vs. 29 [19-48]; P < 0.001), and more units of PRBC transfused within 24 h (18 [13-22] vs. 6 [2-12]; P = 0.001) than the survivor group. More patients underwent angiography in the nonsurvivor group than in the survivor group (92% vs. 61%; P = 0.043). Among embolized vessels, the internal maxillary artery (65%) was the most common bleeding site. Hypoxic encephalopathy accounted for 92% of deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: Protocol-guided management effectively optimizes outcomes in patients with maxillofacial bleeding.