Outcomes of polytrauma patients with diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: The impact of diabetes mellitus in patients with multiple system injuries remains obscure. This study was designed to increase knowledge of outcomes of polytrauma in patients who have diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Data from the Trauma Audit and Research Network was used to identify patients who had suffered polytrauma during 2003 to 2011. These patients were filtered to those with known outcomes, then separated into those with diabetes, those known to have other co-morbidities but not diabetes and those known not to have any co-morbidities or diabetes. The data were analyzed to establish if patients with diabetes had differing outcomes associated with their diabetes versus the other groups. RESULTS: In total, 222 patients had diabetes, 2,558 had no past medical co-morbidities (PMC), 2,709 had PMC but no diabetes. The diabetic group of patients was found to be older than the other groups (P <0.05). A higher mortality rate was found in the diabetic group compared to the non-PMC group (32.4% versus 12.9%), P <0.05). Rates of many complications including renal failure, myocardial infarction, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis were all found to be higher in the diabetic group. CONCLUSIONS: Close monitoring of diabetic patients may result in improved outcomes. Tighter glycemic control and earlier intervention for complications may reduce mortality and morbidity

Consensus statement on abusive head trauma in infants and young children

Abusive head trauma (AHT) is the leading cause of fatal head injuries in children younger than 2 years. A multidisciplinary team bases this diagnosis on history, physical examination, imaging and laboratory findings. Because the etiology of the injury is multifactorial (shaking, shaking and impact, impact, etc.) the current best and inclusive term is AHT. There is no controversy concerning the medical validity of the existence of AHT, with multiple components including subdural hematoma, intracranial and spinal changes, complex retinal hemorrhages, and rib and other fractures that are inconsistent with the provided mechanism of trauma. The workup must exclude medical diseases that can mimic AHT. However, the courtroom has become a forum for speculative theories that cannot be reconciled with generally accepted medical literature. There is no reliable medical evidence that the following processes are causative in the constellation of injuries of AHT: cerebral sinovenous thrombosis, hypoxic-ischemic injury, lumbar puncture or dysphagic choking/vomiting. There is no substantiation, at a time remote from birth, that an asymptomatic birth-related subdural hemorrhage can result in rebleeding and sudden collapse. Further, a diagnosis of AHT is a medical conclusion, not a legal determination of the intent of the perpetrator or a diagnosis of murder. We hope that this consensus document reduces confusion by recommending to judges and jurors the tools necessary to distinguish genuine evidence-based opinions of the relevant medical community from legal arguments or etiological speculations that are unwarranted by the clinical findings, medical evidence and evidence-based literature