Head Injuries in Urban Environment Skiing and Snowboarding : A Retrospective Study on Injury Severity and Injury Mechanisms

Background and Aim: During the last decade urban skiing and snowboarding has gained a lot of popularity. In urban skiing/snowboarding riders try to balance on handrails and jump off buildings. Previous studies in skiing and snowboarding accidents have mostly been conducted at hospitals located close to alpine terrain with big ski resort areas. The aim of this study is to evaluate the types and severity of traumatic brain injuries occurring in small, suburban hills and in urban environment, and to characterize injury patterns to find out the specific mechanisms of injuries behind. Materials and Methods: This study included all patients admitted to the Helsinki University Hospital Trauma Unit from 2006 to 2015 with a head injury (ICD 10 S06-S07) from skiing or snowboarding accidents in Helsinki capital area. Head injuries that did not require a CT-scan, and injuries older than 24hours were excluded from this study. Results: There were a total of 72 patients that met the inclusion criteria Mean length of stay in hospital was 2.95days. According to the AIS classification, 30% had moderate, 14% had severe, and 10% had critical head injuries. Patients who got injured in terrain parks or on streets where more likely to be admitted to ICU than those injured on slopes. Based on GOS score at discharge, 78% were classified as having a good recovery from the injury, 13% had a moderate disability, 5% had a severe disability and 3% of the injuries were fatal. There were no statistically significant differences in decreased GOS between the accident sites. Conclusion: Head injuries occurring in small suburban hills and in urban environments can be serious and potentially fatal. The profile and severity of skiing injuries in urban environments and small, suburban hills is comparable to those on alpine terrain.Peer reviewe

Blunt Abdominal Trauma in a European Trauma Setting : Need for Complex or Non-Complex Skills in Emergency Laparotomy

Background and Aims: Blunt abdominal trauma can lead to substantial organ injury and hemorrhage necessitating open abdominal surgery. Currently, the trend in surgeon training is shifting away from general surgery and the surgical treatment of blunt abdominal trauma patients is often done by sub-specialized surgeons. The aim of this study was to identify what emergency procedures are needed after blunt abdominal trauma and whether they can be performed with the skill set of a general surgeon. Materials and Methods: The records of blunt abdominal trauma patients requiring emergency laparotomy (n = 100) over the period 2006-2016 (Helsinki University Hospital Trauma Registry) were reviewed. The organ injuries and the complexity of the procedures were evaluated. Results: A total of 89 patients (no need for complex skills, NCS) were treated with the skill set of general surgeons while 11 patients required complex skills. Complex skills patients were more severely injured (New Injury Severity Score 56.4 vs 35.9, p <0.001) and had a lower systolic blood pressure (mean: 89 vs 112, p = 0.044) and higher mean shock index (heart rate/systolic blood pressure: 1.43 vs 0.95, p = 0.012) on admission compared with NCS patients. The top three NCS procedures were splenectomy (n = 33), bowel repair (n = 31), and urinary bladder repair (n = 16). In patients requiring a complex procedure (CS), the bleeding site was the liver (n = 7) or a major blood vessel (n = 4). Conclusion: The majority of patients requiring emergency laparotomy can be managed with the skills of a general surgeon. Non-responder blunt abdominal trauma patients with positive ultrasound are highly likely to require complex skills. The future training of surgeons should concentrate on NCS procedures while at the same time recognizing those injuries requiring complex skills.Peer reviewe

Missed Injuries in Polytrauma Patients after Trauma Tertiary Survey in Trauma Intensive Care Unit

Peer reviewe

Trauma-registry survival outcome follow up : 30 days is mandatory and appears sufficient

Introduction: Thirty-day in-hospital mortality is a common outcome measure in trauma-registry research and benchmarking. However, this does not include deaths after hospital discharge before 30 days or late deaths beyond 30 days since the injury. To evaluate the reliability of this outcome measure, we assessed the timing and causes of death during the first year after major blunt trauma in patients treated at a single tertiary trauma center. Methods: We used the Helsinki Trauma Registry to identify severely injured (NISS > 16) blunt trauma patients during 2006 to 2015. The Population Register center of Finland provided the mortality data for patients and Statistics Finland provided the cause of death information from death certificates. Disease, work-related disease, medical treatment, and unknown cause of death were considered as non-trauma related deaths. We divided the 1-year study period into the following three categories: in-hospital death before 30 days (Group 1), death after discharge but within 30 days (Group 2), and death 31 to 365 days since admission (Group 3). Results: We included 3557 patients with a median NISS of 29. Altogether, 21.8% (776/3557) patients died during the first year since the injury. Of these non-survivors, 12.7% (450) were in Group 1, 4.0% (141) in Group 2, and 5.2% (185) in Group 3. Non-traumatic deaths not directly related to the injury increased substantially as the time from the injury increased and were 2.0% (9/450) in Group 1, 13.5% (19/141) in Group 2, and 35.7% (66/185) in Group 3. Conclusion: Thirty-day mortality is a proper outcome that measures survival after severe blunt trauma. However, applying only in-hospital mortality instead of actual 30-day mortality may exclude nonsurvivors who die at another facility before day 30. This could result in over-optimistic benchmarking results. On the other hand, extending the follow-up period beyond 30 days increases the rate of nontraumatic deaths. By combining data from different registries, it is possible to address this challenge in current trauma-registry research caused by lack of follow up. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

Angiographic embolization in the treatment of arterial pelvic hemorrhage: evaluation of prognostic mortality-related factors

PURPOSE: The control of arterial bleeding associated with pelvic ring and acetabular fractures (PRAF) remains a challenge for emergency trauma care. The aim of the present study was to uncover early prognostic mortality-related factors in PRAF-related arterial bleedings treated with transcatheter angiographic embolization (TAE). METHODS: Forty-nine PRAF patients (46 pelvic ring and three acetabular fractures) with arterial pelvic bleeding controlled with TAE (within 24 h) were evaluated. RESULTS: All large arterial disruptions (n = 7) were seen in type C pelvic ring injuries. The 30-day mortality in large vessel (iliac artery) bleeding was higher (57 %) than in medium- or small-size artery bleeding (24 %). Overall 30-day mortality was 29 %. No statistically significant difference in the first laboratory values between the survivors and nonsurvivors was found. However, after excluding patients dying of head injuries (n = 5), a reasonable cut-off value was identified for the base excess (BE; lower than −10 mmol/l) obtained on admission. CONCLUSIONS: PRAF patients with exsanguinating bleeding from the large pelvic artery have the worst prognosis. Very low BE values (<−10.0 mmol/l) on admission for exsanguinating patients have a negative predictive value for survival, thus anticipating a poor outcome in bleeding controlled with TAE only and an increased risk of death. In critical cases, an aggressive bleeding control protocol prompts extraperitoneal pelvic packing prior to TAE. PRAF-related rupture of the external iliac artery is rare and indicates surgical techniques in controlling and restoring blood supply to the lower leg

How to Validate Data Quality in a Trauma Registry? The Helsinki Trauma Registry Internal Audit

Background and Aims: Trauma registry data are used for analyzing and improving patient care, comparison of different units, and for research and administrative purposes. Data should therefore be reliable. The aim of this study was to audit the quality of the Helsinki Trauma Registry internally. We describe how to conduct a validation of a regional or national trauma registry and how to report the results in a readily comprehensible form. Materials and Methods: Trauma registry database of Helsinki Trauma Registry from year 2013 was re-evaluated. We assessed data quality in three different parts of the data input process: the process of including patients in the trauma registry (case completeness); the process of calculating Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) codes; and entering the patient variables in the trauma registry (data completeness, accuracy, and correctness). We calculated the case completeness results using raw agreement percentage and Cohen's kappa value. Percentage and descriptive methods were used for the remaining calculations. Results: In total, 862 patients were evaluated; 853 were rated the same in the audit process resulting in a raw agreement percentage of 99%. Nine cases were missing from the registry, yielding a case completeness of 97.1% for the Helsinki Trauma Registry. For AIS code data, we analyzed 107 patients with severe thorax injury with 941 AIS codes. Completeness of codes was 99.0% (932/941), accuracy was 90.0% (841/932), and correctness was 97.5% (909/932). The data completeness of patient variables was 93.4% (3899/4174). Data completeness was 100% for 16 of 32 categories. Data accuracy was 94.6% (3690/3899) and data correctness was 97.2% (3789/3899). Conclusion: The case completeness, data completeness, data accuracy, and data correctness of the Helsinki Trauma Registry are excellent. We recommend that these should be the variables included in a trauma registry validation process, and that the quality of trauma registry data should be systematically and regularly reviewed and reported.Peer reviewe

The use of aortic balloon occlusion in traumatic shock : first report from the ABO trauma registry

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a technique for temporary stabilization of patients with non-compressible torso hemorrhage. This technique has been increasingly used worldwide during the past decade. Despite the good outcomes of translational studies, clinical studies are divided. The aim of this multicenter-international study was to capture REBOA-specific data and outcomes. REBOA practicing centers were invited to join this online register, which was established in September 2014. REBOA cases were reported, both retrospective and prospective. Demographics, injury patterns, hemodynamic variables, REBOA-specific data, complications and 30-days mortality were reported. Ninety-six cases from 6 different countries were reported between 2011 and 2016. Mean age was 52 +/- 22 years and 88% of the cases were blunt trauma with a median injury severity score (ISS) of 41 (IQR 29-50). In the majority of the cases, Zone I REBOA was used. Median systolic blood pressure before balloon inflation was 60 mmHg (IQR 40-80), which increased to 100 mmHg (IQR 80-128) after inflation. Continuous occlusion was applied in 52% of the patients, and 48% received non-continuous occlusion. Occlusion time longer than 60 min was reported as 38 and 14% in the non-continuous and continuous groups, respectively. Complications, such as extremity compartment syndrome (n = 3), were only noted in the continuous occlusion group. The 30-day mortality for non-continuous REBOA was 48%, and 64% for continuous occlusion. This observational multicenter study presents results regarding continuous and non-continuous REBOA with favorable outcomes. However, further prospective studies are needed to be able to draw conclusions on morbidity and mortality.Peer reviewe

Pre-hospital CPR and early REBOA in trauma patients-results from the ABOTrauma Registry

Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s).Background: Severely injured trauma patients suffering from traumatic cardiac arrest (TCA) and requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) rarely survive. The role of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) performed early after hospital admission in patients with TCA is not well-defined. As the use of REBOA increases, there is great interest in knowing if there is a survival benefit related to the early use of REBOA after TCA. Using data from the ABOTrauma Registry, we aimed to study the role of REBOA used early after hospital admission in trauma patients who required pre-hospital CPR. Methods: Retrospective and prospective data on the use of REBOA were collected from the ABOTrauma Registry from 11 centers in seven countries globally between 2014 and 2019. In all patients with pre-hospital TCA, the predicted probability of survival, calculated with the Revised Injury Severity Classification II (RISC II), was compared with the observed survival rate. Results: Of 213 patients in the ABOTrauma Registry, 26 patients (12.2%) who had received pre-hospital CPR were identified. The median (range) Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 45.5 (25-75). Fourteen patients (54%) had been admitted to the hospital with ongoing CPR. Nine patients (35%) died within the first 24 h, while seventeen patients (65%) survived post 24 h. The survival rate to hospital discharge was 27% (n = 7). The predicted mortality using the RISC II was 0.977 (25 out of 26). The observed mortality (19 out of 26) was significantly lower than the predicted mortality (p = 0.049). Patients not responding to REBOA were more likely to die. Only one (10%) out of 10 non-responders survived. The survival rate in the 16 patients responding to REBOA was 37.5% (n = 6). REBOA with a median (range) duration of 45 (8-70) minutes significantly increases blood pressure from the median (range) 56.5 (0-147) to 90 (0-200) mmHg. Conclusions: Mortality in patients suffering from TCA and receiving REBOA early after hospital admission is significantly lower than predicted by the RISC II. REBOA may improve survival after TCA. The use of REBOA in these patients should be further investigated.Peer reviewe

The open abdomen in trauma and non-trauma patients : WSES guidelines

Damage control resuscitation may lead to postoperative intra-abdominal hypertension or abdominal compartment syndrome. These conditions may result in a vicious, self-perpetuating cycle leading to severe physiologic derangements and multiorgan failure unless interrupted by abdominal (surgical or other) decompression. Further, in some clinical situations, the abdomen cannot be closed due to the visceral edema, the inability to control the compelling source of infection or the necessity to re-explore (as a "planned second-look" laparotomy) or complete previously initiated damage control procedures or in cases of abdominal wall disruption. The open abdomen in trauma and non-trauma patients has been proposed to be effective in preventing or treating deranged physiology in patients with severe injuries or critical illness when no other perceived options exist. Its use, however, remains controversial as it is resource consuming and represents a non-anatomic situation with the potential for severe adverse effects. Its use, therefore, should only be considered in patients who would most benefit from it. Abdominal fascia-to-fascia closure should be done as soon as the patient can physiologically tolerate it. All precautions to minimize complications should be implemented.Peer reviewe