UTILITY OF COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY RECONSTRUCTED THORACOLUMBAR SPINAL IMAGING IN BLUNT TRAUMA.

OBJECTIVES: Fractures of the thoracolumbar(TL) spine are common and may cause neurologic damage, pain, and reduced quality of life. CT TL reconstructions from CT chest/abdomen/pelvis(CAP) are used to identify TL fractures, however their benefit over CAP imaging is unclear. We hypothesized that reformatted TL images do not identify additional clinically significant injuries or change outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected 2016-2021 from trauma patients at a level-1 trauma center. All patients ≥18 years old, with TL fractures on CT CAP with/without CT TL reformats were included. Clinically significant TL fractures were defined as requiring operative fixation, brace, or spinal rehabilitation. A binary classification model was created to assess the diagnostic utility of CTCAP compared to CTTL in predicting clinically significant fractures in patients who underwent CT CAP/TL. RESULTS: There were 828 patients with TL fractures, 634 had both CT CAP/CT TL (CAPTL) and 194CTCAP only (CAP). There were 134(16%) clinically significant TL fractures (14(7.2%) CT CAP vs120(18.9%) CT CAPTL,p \u3c 0.001). There were no differences among unstable fractures, fractures on MRI only, mortality, or neurologic deficits on discharge between CAPTL and CAP(p \u3e 0.05). Among clinically significant fractures, CAPTL was not associated with increased MRI utilization, surgery, spinal brace, or spinal cord rehabilitation(p \u3e 0.05). Among clinically insignificant fractures, CAPTL was associated with increased MRIs, LOS, and ICU LOS (p \u3c 0.05). CAPTL was also an independent predictor of increased MRIs (OR5.79,CI2.29-14.65,p \u3c 0.01) and spine consultation (OR2.39,CI1.64-3.67,p \u3c 0.01). More CTCAP/TL were performed in those with clinically significant fractures; however, CTCAP was equivalent to CTTL for detection of fractures(p \u3e 0.05). CONCLUSION: CTCAP alone is sufficient to identify clinically significant TL fractures. While the addition of TL reformatted imaging minimizes missed injuries, it is associated with increased hospital length of stay and MRI resource utilization. Therefore, careful consideration is needed for appropriate CT TL patient selection. STUDY TYPE: Original Research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV/Diagnostic Test

Mesenteric venous thrombosis: A lethal complication of hyperglycemic crises.

PURPOSE: Although hyperglycemic crises can lead to a hypercoagulable state, few instances of associated mesenteric venous thrombosis (MVT) have been reported. Worsening abdominal pain in the context of shock requiring vasopressor support should prompt urgent further investigation. SUMMARY: A 44-year-old Hispanic male arrived at an emergency department with chief complaints of lethargy, polydipsia, and polyuria. His past medical history included type 2 diabetes, epilepsy, obesity, tobacco smoking, and noncompliance with his medications. On arrival the patient had a serum glucose concentration of \u3e1,600 mg/dL, and hyperosmolar hyperglycemic syndrome (HHS) was diagnosed. The patient was admitted to the intensive care unit with respiratory failure and subsequently developed shock refractory to fluid resuscitation, necessitating vasopressor support. On hospital day 4, a computerized tomogram obtained for investigation of increasing abdominal tenderness revealed superior MVT and pneumatosis intestinalis. Despite an emergency laparotomy and enterectomy, the patient ultimately succumbed on hospital day 41 due to recurrent pneumonia complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome and septic shock. CONCLUSION: Shock that is refractory to aggressive fluid resuscitation, necessitating pressor support, in the setting of HHS or diabetic ketoacidosis should prompt investigation for the underlying source of shock. Other etiologies, including hypovolemic, cardiogenic, and obstructive shock, should be considered; however, infection is the leading trigger of hyperglycemic crises. Although rarely reported, MVT should be considered in the diagnostic algorithm in the absence of an identified infectious source. Prompt investigation should include use of diagnostic modalities such as computed tomography to assess for MVT

Fever in the ICU: A Predictor of Mortality in Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients.

PURPOSE: While fever may be a presenting symptom of COVID-19, fever at hospital admission has not been identified as a predictor of mortality. However, hyperthermia during critical illness among ventilated COVID-19 patients in the ICU has not yet been studied. We sought to determine mortality predictors among ventilated COVID-19 ICU patients and we hypothesized that fever in the ICU is predictive of mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 103 ventilated COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between March 14 and May 27, 2020. Final follow-up was June 5, 2020. Patients discharged from the ICU or who died were included. Patients still admitted to the ICU at final follow-up were excluded. RESULTS: 103 patients were included, 40 survived and 63(61.1%) died. Deceased patients were older {66 years[IQR18] vs 62.5[IQR10], ( CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first studies to identify ICU hyperthermia as predictive of mortality in ventilated COVID-19 patients. Additional predictors included male sex, age, and acidosis. With COVID-19 cases increasing, identification of ICU mortality predictors is crucial to improve risk stratification, resource management, and patient outcomes

Screening and intervention for intimate partner violence at trauma centers and emergency departments: an evidence-based systematic review from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

Background Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health issue with a substantial burden on society. Screening and intervention practices vary widely and there are no standard guidelines. Our objective was to review research on current practices for IPV prevention in emergency departments and trauma centers in the USA and provide evidenced-based recommendations.Methods An evidence-based systematic review of the literature was conducted to address screening and intervention for IPV in adult trauma and emergency department patients. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology was used to determine the quality of evidence. Studies were included if they addressed our prespecified population, intervention, control, and outcomes questions. Case reports, editorials, and abstracts were excluded from review.Results Seven studies met inclusion criteria. All seven were centered around screening for IPV; none addressed interventions when abuse was identified. Screening instruments varied across studies. Although it is unclear if one tool is more accurate than others, significantly more victims were identified when screening protocols were implemented compared with non-standardized approaches to identifying IPV victims.Conclusion Overall, there were very limited data addressing the topic of IPV screening and intervention in emergency medical settings, and the quality of the evidence was low. With likely low risk and a significant potential benefit, we conditionally recommend implementation of a screening protocol to identify victims of IPV in adults treated in the emergency department and trauma centers. Although the purpose of screening would ultimately be to provide resources for victims, no studies that assessed distinct interventions met our inclusion criteria. Therefore, we cannot make specific recommendations related to IPV interventions.PROSPERO registration number CRD42020219517

Prospective validation and application of the Trauma-Specific Frailty Index: Results of an American Association for the Surgery of Trauma multi-institutional observational trial.

BACKGROUND: The frailty index is a known predictor of adverse outcomes in geriatric patients. Trauma-Specific Frailty Index (TSFI) was created and validated at a single center to accurately identify frailty and reliably predict worse outcomes among geriatric trauma patients. This study aims to prospectively validate the TSFI in a multi-institutional cohort of geriatric trauma patients. METHODS: This is a prospective, observational, multi-institutional trial across 17 American College of Surgeons Levels I, II, and III trauma centers. All geriatric trauma patients (65 years and older) presenting during a 3-year period were included. Frailty status was measured within 24 hours of admission using the TSFI (15 variables), and patients were stratified into nonfrail (TSFI, ≤0.12), prefrail (TSFI, 0.13-0.25), and frail (TSFI, \u3e0.25) groups. Outcome measures included index admission mortality, discharge to rehabilitation centers or skilled nursing facilities (rehab/SNFs), and 3-month postdischarge readmissions, fall recurrences, complications, and mortality among survivors of index admission. RESULTS: A total of 1,321 geriatric trauma patients were identified and enrolled for validation of TSFI (nonfrail, 435 [33%]; prefrail, 392 [30%]; frail, 494 [37%]). The mean ± SD age was 77 ± 8 years; the median (interquartile range) Injury Severity Score was 9 (5-13). Overall, 179 patients (14%) had a major complication, 554 (42%) were discharged to rehab/SNFs, and 63 (5%) died during the index admission. Compared with nonfrail patients, frail patients had significantly higher odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.93; p = 0.018), major complications (aOR, 3.55; p \u3c 0.001), and discharge to rehab/SNFs (aOR, 1.98; p \u3c 0.001). In addition, frailty was significantly associated with higher adjusted odds of mortality, major complications, readmissions, and fall recurrence at 3 months postdischarge ( p \u3c 0.05). CONCLUSION: External applicability of the TSFI (15 variables) was evident at a multicenter cohort of 17 American College of Surgeons trauma centers in geriatric trauma patients. The TSFI emerged as an independent predictor of worse outcomes, both in the short-term and 3-month postdischarge. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III

Outcomes among trauma patients with duodenal leak following primary versus complex repair of duodenal injuries: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial

BACKGROUND: Duodenal leak is a feared complication of repair, and innovative complex repairs with adjunctive measures (CRAM) were developed to decrease both leak occurrence and severity when leaks occur. Data on the association of CRAM and duodenal leak are sparse, and its impact on duodenal leak outcomes is nonexistent. We hypothesized that primary repair alone (PRA) would be associated with decreased duodenal leak rates; however, CRAM would be associated with improved recovery and outcomes when leaks do occur. METHODS: A retrospective, multicenter analysis from 35 Level 1 trauma centers included patients older than 14 years with operative, traumatic duodenal injuries (January 2010 to December 2020). The study sample compared duodenal operative repair strategy: PRA versus CRAM (any repair plus pyloric exclusion, gastrojejunostomy, triple tube drainage, duodenectomy). RESULTS: The sample (N = 861) was primarily young (33 years) men (84%) with penetrating injuries (77%); 523 underwent PRA and 338 underwent CRAM. Complex repairs with adjunctive measures were more critically injured than PRA and had higher leak rates (CRAM 21% vs. PRA 8%, p \u3c 0.001). Adverse outcomes were more common after CRAM with more interventional radiology drains, prolonged nothing by mouth and length of stay, greater mortality, and more readmissions than PRA (all p \u3c 0.05). Importantly, CRAM had no positive impact on leak recovery; there was no difference in number of operations, drain duration, nothing by mouth duration, need for interventional radiology drainage, hospital length of stay, or mortality between PRA leak versus CRAM leak patients (all p \u3e 0.05). Furthermore, CRAM leaks had longer antibiotic duration, more gastrointestinal complications, and longer duration until leak resolution (all p \u3c 0.05). Primary repair alone was associated with 60% lower odds of leak, whereas injury grades II to IV, damage control, and body mass index had higher odds of leak (all p \u3c 0.05). There were no leaks among patients with grades IV and V injuries repaired by PRA. CONCLUSION: Complex repairs with adjunctive measures did not prevent duodenal leaks and, moreover, did not reduce adverse sequelae when leaks did occur. Our results suggest that CRAM is not a protective operative duodenal repair strategy, and PRA should be pursued for all injury grades when feasible. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV