American journal of surgery · 2019
Major venous injury and large volume crystalloid resuscitation: A limb threatening combination.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Dauer Elizabeth, Yamaguchi Seiji, Yu Daohai, Lu Xiaoning, Kelley Kathyrn, Sharpe John, Manley Nathan, Harvin John A, Taub Ethan A, Goldenberg-Sandau Anna, Patel Krishan, Omi Ellen, Mashbari Hassan, Hartwell Jennifer, Brocker Jason
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Major venous injury (MVI) affecting the lower extremity can result in subsequent amputation. The contribution of intraoperative resuscitation efforts on the need for amputation is not well defined. We hypothesized that intraoperative large volume crystalloid resuscitation (LVCR) increases the risk of amputation after MVI, while massive transfusion (MT) does not.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with infrarenal MVI from 2005 to 2015 at seven urban level I trauma centers. The outcome of interest was the need for secondary amputation.
RESULTS: 478 patients were included. 31 (6.5%) patients with MVI required amputation. LVCR(p < 0.001), combined arterial/venous injury (p = 0.001), and associated fracture (p = 0.001) were significant risk factors for amputation. MT did not significantly increase amputation risk (p = 0.44). Multivariable logistic regression model demonstrated that patients receiving ≥5L LVCR(aOR (95% CI): 9.7 (2.9, 33.0); p < 0.001), with combined arterial/venous injury (aOR (95% CI):3.6 (1.5, 8.5); p = 0.004), and with an associated fracture (aOR (95% CI):3.2 (1.5, 7.1); p = 0.004) were more likely to require amputation.
CONCLUSION: Patients with MVI who receive LVCR, have combined arterial/venous injuries and have associated fractures are more likely to require amputation. MT was not associated with delayed amputation.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with infrarenal MVI from 2005 to 2015 at seven urban level I trauma centers. The outcome of interest was the need for secondary amputation.
RESULTS: 478 patients were included. 31 (6.5%) patients with MVI required amputation. LVCR(p < 0.001), combined arterial/venous injury (p = 0.001), and associated fracture (p = 0.001) were significant risk factors for amputation. MT did not significantly increase amputation risk (p = 0.44). Multivariable logistic regression model demonstrated that patients receiving ≥5L LVCR(aOR (95% CI): 9.7 (2.9, 33.0); p < 0.001), with combined arterial/venous injury (aOR (95% CI):3.6 (1.5, 8.5); p = 0.004), and with an associated fracture (aOR (95% CI):3.2 (1.5, 7.1); p = 0.004) were more likely to require amputation.
CONCLUSION: Patients with MVI who receive LVCR, have combined arterial/venous injuries and have associated fractures are more likely to require amputation. MT was not associated with delayed amputation.