MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1097/ta.0000000000004391

Медицинская библиотека · The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2024

pREBOA versus ER-REBOA impact on blood utilization and resuscitation requirements: A pilot analysis.

Meyer Courtney H, Beckett Andrew, Dennis Bradley M, Duchesne Juan, Kundi Rishi, Pandya Urmil, Lawless Ryan, Moore Ernest, Spalding Chance, Vassy William M, Nguyen Jonathan, AAST AORTA Study Group

СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Partial occlusion of the aorta is a resuscitation technique designed to maximize proximal perfusion while allowing a graduated amount of distal flow to reduce the ischemic sequelae associated with complete aortic occlusion. The pREBOA-PRO catheter affords the ability to titrate perfusion as hemodynamics allows; however, the impact of this new technology for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) on blood use and other resuscitative requirements is currently unknown. We hypothesize that patients undergoing REBOA with the pREBOA-PRO catheter will utilize partial occlusion, when appropriate, and decrease overall resuscitative requirements when compared to patients undergoing REBOA with the ER-REBOA catheter.

METHODS

The entire American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry was used to compare resuscitation requirements between all ER-REBOA and pREBOA. Unpaired t tests were used to compare resuscitation strategies including packed red blood cells (PRBCs), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), platelets, cryoprecipitate, crystalloids, and need for pressors.

RESULTS

When comparing ER-REBOA (n = 800) use to pREBOA (n = 155), initial patient presentations were similar except for age (44 years vs. 40 years, p = 0.026) and rates of blunt injury (78.4% vs. 78.7% p < 0.010). Zone 1 occlusion was used less often in ER-REBOA (65.8 vs. 71.7, p = 0.046). Partial occlusion was performed in 85% of pREBOA compared with 11% in ER-REBOA ( p < 0.050). Vitals at the time of REBOA were worse in ER-REBOA and received significantly more units of PRBCs, FFP, platelets, and liters of crystalloids than pREBOA ( p < 0.05). Rates of ARDS and septic shock were lower in pREBOA ( p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

When comparing pREBOA to ER-REBOA, there has been a rise in Zone 1 and partial occlusion. In our pilot analysis of the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry, there was a reduction in administration of PRBCs, FFP, platelets, and crystalloids. Although further prospective studies are required, this is the first to demonstrate an association between pREBOA, partial occlusion, and reduced blood use and resuscitative requirements.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Для цитирования: Meyer Courtney H, Beckett Andrew, Dennis Bradley M, Duchesne Juan, Kundi Rishi, Pandya Urmil, Lawless Ryan, Moore Ernest, Spalding Chance, Vassy William M, Nguyen Jonathan, AAST AORTA Study Group. pREBOA versus ER-REBOA impact on blood utilization and resuscitation requirements: A pilot analysis.. The journal of trauma and acute care surgery. 2024. DOI: 10.1097/ta.0000000000004391.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.