9 research outputs found

    Comparison of military and civilian surgeon outcomes with emergent trauma laparotomy in a mature military-civilian partnership

    No full text
    Introduction Medical readiness is of paramount concern for active-duty military providers. Low volumes of complex trauma in military treatment facilities has driven the armed forces to embed surgeons in high-volume civilian centers to maintain clinical readiness. It is unclear what impact this strategy may have on patient outcomes in these centers. We sought to compare emergent trauma laparotomy (ETL) outcomes between active-duty Air Force Special Operations Surgical Team (SOST) general surgeons and civilian faculty at an American College of Surgeons verified level 1 trauma center with a well-established military-civilian partnership.Methods Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained, single-center database of ETL from 2019 to 2022 was performed. ETL was defined as laparotomy from trauma bay within 90 min of patient arrival. The primary outcome was to assess for all-cause mortality differences at multiple time points.Results 514 ETL were performed during the study period. 22% (113 of 514) of patients were hypotensive (systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg) on arrival. Six SOST surgeons performed 43 ETL compared with 471 ETL by civilian faculty. There were no differences in median ED length of stay (27 min vs 22 min; p=0.21), but operative duration was significantly longer for SOST surgeons (129 min vs 110 min; p=0.01). There were no differences in intraoperative (5% vs 2%; p=0.30), 6-hour (3% vs 5%; p=0.64), 24-hour (5% vs 5%; p=1.0), or in-hospital mortality rates (5% vs 8%; p=0.56) between SOST and civilian surgeons. SOST surgeons did not significantly impact the odds of 24-hour mortality on multivariable analysis (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.10, 6.09).Conclusion Trauma-related mortality for patients undergoing ETL was not impacted by SOST surgeons when compared with their civilian counterparts. Military surgeons may benefit from the valuable clinical experience and mentorship of experienced civilian trauma surgeons at high volume trauma centers without creating a deficit in the quality of care provided.Level of evidence Level IV, therapeutic/care management

    Use of continuous intercostal nerve blockade is associated with improved outcomes in patients with multiple rib fractures

    No full text
    Background Rib fractures are common among trauma patients and may result in significant morbidity and mortality. There are numerous treatment options, but ideal management is unclear. Delivery of local anesthetic via an analgesia catheter for continuous intercostal nerve blockade offers an attractive potential option for management of patients with rib fractures.Methods We performed a single-center, retrospective case–control analysis of trauma patients with multiple rib fractures from 2016 to 2018, comparing patients managed with continuous intercostal nerve blockade with standard care. Matching was performed in a 2:1 ratio by Injury Severity Score, age, and gender. Respiratory morbidity potentially secondary to rib fractures, including unplanned intubation, failure of extubation, need for tracheostomy, pneumonia, or mortality, were all identified and included. Potential complications due to catheter insertion were identified to be recorded. The primary outcome of interest was 30-day hospital-free days.Results Nine hundred and thirty-three patients were eligible for analysis, with 48 managed using intercostal blockade compared with 96 matching controls. No complications of intercostal blockade were identified during the study period. Controls demonstrated fewer rib fractures (6.60±4.11 vs. 9.3±3.73, p=0.001) and fewer flail segments (0.8±1.76 vs. 2.0±2.94, p=0.02). Those managed with intercostal blockade demonstrated significantly more 30-day hospital-free days (15.9±6.43 vs. 13.2±9.94, p=0.048), less incidence of pneumonia (4.2% vs. 16.7%, p=0.03), and lower hospital mortality (2.1% vs. 13.5%, p=0.03). When adjusting for number of rib fractures and number of flail segments, use of continuous intercostal nerve blockade was significantly associated with lower hospital mortality (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.91), pneumonia (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.76), or need for tracheostomy (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.83).Discussion The addition of continuous intercostal nerve blockade may help to improve outcomes in patients with multiple rib fractures compared with standard care alone.Level of evidence Therapeutic/care management; level IV

    Impact of initial temporary abdominal closure in damage control surgery: a retrospective analysis

    No full text
    Abstract Background Damage control surgery has revolutionized trauma surgery. Use of damage control surgery allows for resuscitation and reversal of coagulopathy at the risk of loss of abdominal domain and intra-abdominal complications. Temporary abdominal closure is possible with multiple techniques, the choice of which may affect ability to achieve primary fascial closure and further complication. Methods A retrospective analysis of all trauma patients requiring damage control laparotomy upon admission to an ACS-verified level one trauma center from 2011 to 2016 was performed. Demographic and clinical data including ability and time to attain primary fascial closure, as well as complication rates, were recorded. The primary outcome measure was ability to achieve primary fascial closure during initial hospitalization. Results Two hundred and thirty-nine patients met criteria for inclusion. Primary skin closure (57.7%), ABThera™ VAC system (ABT) (15.1%), Bogota bag (BB) (25.1%), or a modified Barker’s vacuum-packing (BVP) (2.1%) were used in the initial laparotomy. Patients receiving skin-only closure had significantly higher rates of primary fascial closure and lower hospital mortality, but also significantly lower mean lactate, base deficit, and requirement for massive transfusion. Between ABT or BB, use of ABT was associated with increased rates of fascial closure. Multivariate regression revealed primary skin closure to be significantly associated with primary fascial closure while BB was associated with failure to achieve fascial closure. Conclusions Primary skin closure is a viable option in the initial management of the open abdomen, although these patients demonstrated less injury burden in our study. Use of vacuum-assisted dressings continues to be the preferred method for temporary abdominal closure in damage control surgery for trauma
    corecore