Futility indications in resuscitative thoracotomy: A retrospective observational study evaluating practice guidelines

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Gabriella H. Kalantar , Cynthia I. Villalta , Michael West , Mason Ragsdale , Heather M. Grossman Verner , Rachel M. Krezczowski , Joseph D. Amos , Vanessa Shifflette
{"title":"Futility indications in resuscitative thoracotomy: A retrospective observational study evaluating practice guidelines","authors":"Gabriella H. Kalantar ,&nbsp;Cynthia I. Villalta ,&nbsp;Michael West ,&nbsp;Mason Ragsdale ,&nbsp;Heather M. Grossman Verner ,&nbsp;Rachel M. Krezczowski ,&nbsp;Joseph D. Amos ,&nbsp;Vanessa Shifflette","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2025.112673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Resuscitative thoracotomies (RTs) are controversial interventions that heavily consume resources and can pose risks for the surgical team. Increasingly limited resources and risk to healthcare teams have encouraged the continued refinement of RT guidelines. We evaluated RT futility indicators amid institutional RT practice guideline changes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Thoracotomies conducted at our Level 1 Trauma Center from January 2017 to July 2023 were reviewed and classified as either RT or non-resuscitative (non-RT). Injury characteristics, patient demographics, procedure details, and mortality outcomes were collected through chart review.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 78 thoracotomies, 56 (71.8 %) were RTs, predominantly on patients with penetrating injuries (55.4 %), specifically gunshot wounds (46.4 %). Most RTs (87.5 %) complied with Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma guidelines. The procedure mortality rate was 4.6 % for non-RT and 67.9 % for RT, and hospital mortality was 13.6 % for non-RT and 89.3 % for RT. Thus, 10.7 % of RT patients survived to discharge, including 5 (16.2 %) with penetrating injuries and 1 (4.0 %) with blunt injuries. Ten (17.8 %) RT patients arrived with fixed and dilated pupils, 11 (19.6 %) arrived with no signs of life, and 4 (10.7 %) received pre-hospital CPR, all of whom did not survive to discharge. Changes in institutional practice guidelines decreased the frequency of total thoracotomies, but not RT numbers.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>RT utilization and mortality rates remained consistent after implementing stricter institutional guideline policies. Improving odds of survival may require further refinement to RT practice guidelines regarding patient selection criteria. We recommend adding witnessed cardiac arrest and prioritizing pupillary response to RT futility guidelines regardless of injury pattern.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54978,"journal":{"name":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","volume":"56 10","pages":"Article 112673"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020138325005339","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Resuscitative thoracotomies (RTs) are controversial interventions that heavily consume resources and can pose risks for the surgical team. Increasingly limited resources and risk to healthcare teams have encouraged the continued refinement of RT guidelines. We evaluated RT futility indicators amid institutional RT practice guideline changes.

Methods

Thoracotomies conducted at our Level 1 Trauma Center from January 2017 to July 2023 were reviewed and classified as either RT or non-resuscitative (non-RT). Injury characteristics, patient demographics, procedure details, and mortality outcomes were collected through chart review.

Results

Of 78 thoracotomies, 56 (71.8 %) were RTs, predominantly on patients with penetrating injuries (55.4 %), specifically gunshot wounds (46.4 %). Most RTs (87.5 %) complied with Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma guidelines. The procedure mortality rate was 4.6 % for non-RT and 67.9 % for RT, and hospital mortality was 13.6 % for non-RT and 89.3 % for RT. Thus, 10.7 % of RT patients survived to discharge, including 5 (16.2 %) with penetrating injuries and 1 (4.0 %) with blunt injuries. Ten (17.8 %) RT patients arrived with fixed and dilated pupils, 11 (19.6 %) arrived with no signs of life, and 4 (10.7 %) received pre-hospital CPR, all of whom did not survive to discharge. Changes in institutional practice guidelines decreased the frequency of total thoracotomies, but not RT numbers.

Discussion

RT utilization and mortality rates remained consistent after implementing stricter institutional guideline policies. Improving odds of survival may require further refinement to RT practice guidelines regarding patient selection criteria. We recommend adding witnessed cardiac arrest and prioritizing pupillary response to RT futility guidelines regardless of injury pattern.
复苏开胸术的无效指征:一项评估实践指南的回顾性观察研究
背景:复苏开胸术(rt)是一种有争议的干预措施,它大量消耗资源,并可能给外科团队带来风险。越来越有限的资源和医疗团队面临的风险鼓励了RT指南的不断完善。我们评估了机构RT实践指南变化中的RT无效指标。方法回顾2017年1月至2023年7月在我院一级创伤中心进行的开胸手术,并将其分为RT和非RT两类。通过图表回顾收集了损伤特征、患者人口统计、手术细节和死亡率结果。结果78例开胸手术中,56例(71.8%)为RTs,主要是穿透伤(55.4%),特别是枪伤(46.4%)。大多数RTs(87.5%)符合东部创伤外科协会指南。非放射治疗的手术死亡率为4.6%,放射治疗的死亡率为67.9%,非放射治疗的住院死亡率为13.6%,放射治疗的住院死亡率为89.3%。因此,10.7%的放射治疗患者存活至出院,其中5例(16.2%)为穿透性损伤,1例(4.0%)为钝性损伤。10例(17.8%)RT患者到达时瞳孔固定和扩大,11例(19.6%)到达时没有生命迹象,4例(10.7%)接受院前心肺复苏术,所有患者都没有存活到出院。机构实践指南的改变降低了全胸切开手术的频率,但没有降低RT数。讨论在实施更严格的制度指导政策后,rt的使用率和死亡率保持一致。提高生存率可能需要进一步完善关于患者选择标准的RT实践指南。我们建议无论损伤类型如何,在RT无效指南中增加心脏骤停和瞳孔反应的优先级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
8.00%
发文量
699
审稿时长
96 days
期刊介绍: Injury was founded in 1969 and is an international journal dealing with all aspects of trauma care and accident surgery. Our primary aim is to facilitate the exchange of ideas, techniques and information among all members of the trauma team.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信