Current outcomes of blunt open pelvic fractures: how modern advances in trauma care may decrease mortality.

Background:Open pelvic fracture, caused by a blunt mechanism, is an uncommon injury with a high mortality rate. In 2008, evidence-based algorithm for managing pelvic fractures in unstable patients was published by the Western Trauma Association (WTA). The use of massive transfusion protocols has become widespread as has the availability and use of pelvic angiography. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of open pelvic fractures in association with related advances in trauma care. Methods:A retrospective review was performed, at an American College of Surgeon verified level I trauma center, of patients with blunt open pelvic fractures from January 2010 to April 2016. The WTA algorithm, including massive transfusion protocol, and pelvic angiography were uniformly used. Data collected included injury severity score, demographic data, transfusion requirements, use of pelvic angiography, length of stay, and disposition. Data were compared with a similar study from 2005. Results:During the study period, 1505 patients with pelvic fractures were analyzed; 87 (6%) patients had open pelvic fractures. Of these, 25 were from blunt mechanisms and made up the study population. Patients in both studies had similar injury severity scores, ages, Glasgow Coma Scale, and gender distributions. Use of angiography was higher (44% vs. 16%; P=0.011) and mortality was lower (16% vs. 45%; P=0.014) than in the 2005 study. Conclusions:Changes in trauma care for patients with open blunt pelvic fracture include the use of an evidence-based algorithm, massive transfusion protocols and increased use of angioembolization. Mortality for open pelvic fractures has decreased with these advances. Level of evidence:Level IV

Lower extremity amputation protocol: a pilot enhanced recovery pathway for vascular amputees

Vascular patients, an inherently older, frail population, account for >80% of major lower extremity amputations (transtibial or transfemoral) in the United States. Retrospective data have shown that early physical therapy and discharge to an acute rehabilitation facility decreases the postoperative length of stay (LOS) and expedites ambulation. In the present study, we sought to determine whether patients treated with the lower extremity amputation protocol (LEAP) will have improved outcomes. We performed a nonrandomized prospective study of vascular patients undergoing an amputation from January 2019 to February 2020. Patients who were nonambulatory or had undergone a previous contralateral major amputation were excluded. LEAP is a multidisciplinary team approach to the perioperative care of amputees using an outlined protocol. The prospective patients were compared with historic controls treated before the initiation of LEAP (January 2016 to December 2018). The primary outcomes included the postoperative LOS, time to receipt of a prosthesis, and time to ambulation. Of the 141 included patients, 130 were in the retrospective group and 11 in the LEAP group. The demographics and comorbidities were similar. All 11 LEAP patients had undergone a below-the-knee amputation, with 1 requiring revision to an above-the-knee amputation. Of the 130 retrospective patients, 122 (94%) had undergone a below-the-knee amputation, with 1 requiring revision to an above-the-knee amputation. The LEAP patients were more likely to be discharged to acute rehabilitation (100% vs 27%; P < .001), receive a prosthesis (100% vs 45%; P < .001), and ambulate with the prosthesis (100% vs 43%; P < .001). The LEAP patients had received physical therapy 2 days sooner than had the retrospective controls (P = .006) with a shorter postoperative LOS (3 days vs 6 days; P < .001). Of the patients who had received their prosthesis, the LEAP patients had received their prosthesis, on average, 2 months sooner than had the retrospective cohort (81 ± 39 days vs 137 ± 97 days, respectively; P = .002) and had ambulated with their prosthesis sooner (86 ± 53 days vs 146 ± 104 days, respectively; P = .002). No differences were found in the incidence of surgical site complications or unplanned readmissions between the two groups. The results from the present pilot study have demonstrated that the use of LEAP can significantly decrease postoperative LOS and expedite the time to independent ambulation with a prosthesis for vascular patients undergoing a major lower extremity amputation. These findings suggest a powerful ability to bridge the healthcare gap for this high-risk, underserved, and ethnically diverse population using a disease-specific standardized protocol

Popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injuries in trauma study.

ObjectiveTraumatic popliteal vascular injuries are associated with the highest risk of limb loss of all peripheral vascular injuries. A method to evaluate the predictors of amputation is needed because previous scores could not be validated. In the present study, we aimed to provide a simplified scoring system (POPSAVEIT [popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injuries in trauma]) that could be used preoperatively to risk stratify patients with traumatic popliteal vascular injuries for amputation.MethodsA review of patients sustaining traumatic popliteal artery injuries was performed. Patients requiring amputation were compared with those with limb salvage at the last follow-up. Of these patients, 80% were randomly assigned to a training group for score generation and 20% to a testing group for validation. Significant predictors of amputation (P < .1) on univariate analysis were included in a multivariable analysis. Those with P < .05 on multivariable analysis were assigned points according to the relative value of their odds ratios (ORs). Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to determine low- vs high-risk scores. An area under the curve of >0.65 was considered adequate for validation.ResultsA total of 355 patients were included, with an overall amputation rate of 16%. On multivariate regression analysis, the risk factors independently associated with amputation in the final model were as follows: systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg (OR, 3.2; P = .027; 1 point), associated orthopedic injury (OR, 4.9; P = .014; 2 points), and a lack of preoperative pedal Doppler signals (OR, 5.5; P = .002; 2 points [or 1 point for a lack of palpable pedal pulses if Doppler signal data were unavailable]). A score of ≥3 was found to maximize the sensitivity (85%) and specificity (49%) for a high risk of amputation. The receiver operating characteristic curve for the validation group had an area under the curve of 0.750, meeting the threshold for score validation.ConclusionsThe POPSAVEIT score provides a simple and practical method to effectively stratify patients preoperatively into low- and high-risk major amputation categories

Contemporary outcomes of traumatic popliteal artery injury repair from the popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injury in trauma study.

ObjectiveTraumatic popliteal artery injuries are associated with the greatest risk of limb loss of all peripheral vascular injuries, with amputation rates of 10% to 15%. The purpose of the present study was to examine the outcomes of patients who had undergone operative repair for traumatic popliteal arterial injuries and identify the factors independently associated with limb loss.MethodsA multi-institutional retrospective review of all patients with traumatic popliteal artery injuries from 2007 to 2018 was performed. All the patients who had undergone operative repair of popliteal arterial injuries were included in the present analysis. The patients who had required a major lower extremity amputation (transtibial or transfemoral) were compared with those with successful limb salvage at the last follow-up. The significant predictors (P < .05) for amputation on univariate analysis were included in a multivariable analysis.ResultsA total of 302 patients from 11 institutions were included in the present analysis. The median age was 32 years (interquartile range, 21-40 years), and 79% were men. The median follow-up was 72 days (interquartile range, 20-366 days). The overall major amputation rate was 13%. Primary repair had been performed in 17% of patients, patch repair in 2%, and interposition or bypass in 81%. One patient had undergone endovascular repair with stenting. The overall 1-year primary patency was 89%. Of the patients who had lost primary patency, 46% ultimately required major amputation. Early loss (within 30 days postoperatively) of primary patency was five times more frequent for the patients who had subsequently required amputation. On multivariate regression, the significant perioperative factors independently associated with major amputation included the initial POPSAVEIT (popliteal scoring assessment for vascular extremity injury in trauma) score, loss of primary patency, absence of detectable immediate postoperative pedal Doppler signals, and lack of postoperative antiplatelet therapy. Concomitant popliteal vein injury, popliteal injury location (P1, P2, P3), injury severity score, and tibial vs popliteal distal bypass target were not independently associated with amputation.ConclusionsTraumatic popliteal artery injuries are associated with a significant rate of major amputation. The preoperative POPSAVEIT score remained independently associated with amputation after including the perioperative factors. The lack of postoperative pedal Doppler signals and loss of primary patency were highly associated with major amputation. The use of postoperative antiplatelet therapy was inversely associated with amputation, perhaps indicating a protective effect

International Multi-Institutional Experience with Presentation and Management of Aortic Arch Laterality in Aberrant Subclavian Artery and Kommerell's Diverticulum

BACKGROUND: Aberrant subclavian artery (ASA) with or without Kommerell's diverticulum (KD) is a rare anatomic aortic arch anomaly that can cause dysphagia and/or life-threatening rupture. The objective of this study is to compare outcomes of ASA/KD repair in patients with a left versus right aortic arch. METHODS: Using the Vascular Low Frequency Disease Consortium methodology, a retrospective review was performed of patients ≥18 years old with surgical treatment of ASA/KD from 2000 to 2020 at 20 institutions. RESULTS: 288 patients with ASA with or without KD were identified; 222 left-sided aortic arch (LAA), and 66 right-sided aortic arch (RAA). Mean age at repair was younger in LAA 54 vs. 58 years (P = 0.06). Patients in RAA were more likely to undergo repair due to symptoms (72.7% vs. 55.9%, P = 0.01), and more likely to present with dysphagia (57.6% vs. 39.1%, P < 0.01). The hybrid open/endovascular approach was the most common repair type in both groups. Rates of intraoperative complications, death within 30 days, return to the operating room, symptom relief and endoleaks were not significantly different. For patients with symptom status follow-up data, in LAA, 61.7% had complete relief, 34.0% had partial relief and 4.3% had no change. In RAA, 60.7% had complete relief, 34.4% had partial relief and 4.9% had no change. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ASA/KD, RAA patients were less common than LAA, presented more frequently with dysphagia, had symptoms as an indication for intervention, and underwent treatment at a younger age. Open, endovascular and hybrid repair approaches appear equally effective, regardless of arch laterality