Predictors of outcome in 215 patients requiring emergency department thoracotomy: A 2-year prospective study in a large urban trauma center.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Surgery Pub Date : 2026-09-07 DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2026.110607
Juan A Asensio, Shane D Martin, Julio Roque-Buenrostro, Eduardo Smith-Singares, David J Mondschein, Santiago A Ceron, Vincent L Rowe, Luis A Garcia, Kenneth L Wilson, Mallory W Williams, Hernán Oliu Lambert, Jose M Velasco
{"title":"Predictors of outcome in 215 patients requiring emergency department thoracotomy: A 2-year prospective study in a large urban trauma center.","authors":"Juan A Asensio, Shane D Martin, Julio Roque-Buenrostro, Eduardo Smith-Singares, David J Mondschein, Santiago A Ceron, Vincent L Rowe, Luis A Garcia, Kenneth L Wilson, Mallory W Williams, Hernán Oliu Lambert, Jose M Velasco","doi":"10.1016/j.surg.2026.110607","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Emergency department thoracotomy is a formidable procedure. We prospectively evaluated physiologic parameters in patients undergoing emergency department thoracotomy, mortality at the scene of the traumatic incident, and upon arrival, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation time, cardiovascular respiratory score, time to emergency department thoracotomy, and restoration of blood pressure, and identified predictors of outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective 2-year study of patients in cardiopulmonary arrest requiring emergency department thoracotomy in a trauma center. Statistical analysis included univariate and stepwise logistic regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred fifteen patients admitted in cardiopulmonary arrest required emergency department thoracotomy. Penetrating injury (n = 167, 78%), gunshot wounds (n = 142, 78.0%), stab wounds (n = 21, 12.6%), shotgun wounds (n = 4, 2.4%), and blunt (n = 48, 22%). The mean revised trauma score was -0.6, the mean injury severity score was -42, and the mean duration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 12 minutes. Emergency department deaths totaled 162 (75%), and 1-hour survivors totaled 53 (25%). Overall survivors were 6 of 215 (2.8%). Penetrating cardiac injury survivors were 6 of 74 (8.2%). Two groups were compared: (1) emergency department deaths versus 1-hour survivors-all physiologic parameters were predictive of outcomes (P < .0001) and (2) 1-hour survivors versus overall survivors-no physiologic parameters were predictive of outcome. Duration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (P = .04), penetrating mechanism (P < .001), and exsanguination (P < .006) were significant. The cardiovascular respiratory score revealed a trend (P = .007). Death versus overall survival-restoration of blood pressure was predictive (P < .006). Stepwise logistic regression, using a 4-factor model, including no spontaneous ventilation, absence of pulse upon arrival, injury severity score >45, and blunt mechanism of injury, was 99.3% predictive of mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For patients presenting in arrest requiring emergency department thoracotomy, all parameters plus a cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration of 12 minutes are predictive of mortality. Seventy-five percent of patients can be excluded from emergency department thoracotomy. Emergency department thoracotomy should be applied selectively to patients sustaining penetrating cardiac injuries and some vascular injuries.</p>","PeriodicalId":22152,"journal":{"name":"Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"110607"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2026.110607","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Emergency department thoracotomy is a formidable procedure. We prospectively evaluated physiologic parameters in patients undergoing emergency department thoracotomy, mortality at the scene of the traumatic incident, and upon arrival, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation time, cardiovascular respiratory score, time to emergency department thoracotomy, and restoration of blood pressure, and identified predictors of outcomes.

Methods: This was a prospective 2-year study of patients in cardiopulmonary arrest requiring emergency department thoracotomy in a trauma center. Statistical analysis included univariate and stepwise logistic regression analysis.

Results: Two hundred fifteen patients admitted in cardiopulmonary arrest required emergency department thoracotomy. Penetrating injury (n = 167, 78%), gunshot wounds (n = 142, 78.0%), stab wounds (n = 21, 12.6%), shotgun wounds (n = 4, 2.4%), and blunt (n = 48, 22%). The mean revised trauma score was -0.6, the mean injury severity score was -42, and the mean duration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 12 minutes. Emergency department deaths totaled 162 (75%), and 1-hour survivors totaled 53 (25%). Overall survivors were 6 of 215 (2.8%). Penetrating cardiac injury survivors were 6 of 74 (8.2%). Two groups were compared: (1) emergency department deaths versus 1-hour survivors-all physiologic parameters were predictive of outcomes (P < .0001) and (2) 1-hour survivors versus overall survivors-no physiologic parameters were predictive of outcome. Duration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (P = .04), penetrating mechanism (P < .001), and exsanguination (P < .006) were significant. The cardiovascular respiratory score revealed a trend (P = .007). Death versus overall survival-restoration of blood pressure was predictive (P < .006). Stepwise logistic regression, using a 4-factor model, including no spontaneous ventilation, absence of pulse upon arrival, injury severity score >45, and blunt mechanism of injury, was 99.3% predictive of mortality.

Conclusion: For patients presenting in arrest requiring emergency department thoracotomy, all parameters plus a cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration of 12 minutes are predictive of mortality. Seventy-five percent of patients can be excluded from emergency department thoracotomy. Emergency department thoracotomy should be applied selectively to patients sustaining penetrating cardiac injuries and some vascular injuries.

215例急诊科开胸患者预后预测因素:一项大型城市创伤中心的2年前瞻性研究
背景:急诊科开胸术是一项艰巨的手术。我们前瞻性地评估了急诊科开胸患者的生理参数、创伤事件现场和到达时的死亡率,包括心肺复苏时间、心血管呼吸评分、到急诊科开胸时间和血压恢复,并确定了预后的预测因素。方法:这是一项为期2年的前瞻性研究,研究对象是在创伤中心急诊科接受开胸手术的心肺骤停患者。统计分析包括单因素和逐步logistic回归分析。结果:215例心肺骤停患者需要急诊开胸。穿透伤(n = 167, 78%)、枪伤(n = 142, 78.0%)、刀伤(n = 21, 12.6%)、猎枪伤(n = 4, 2.4%)、钝伤(n = 48, 22%)。修正创伤平均评分为-0.6,损伤严重程度平均评分为-42,心肺复苏平均持续时间为12分钟。急诊死亡162人(75%),1小时幸存者53人(25%)。215名幸存者中有6名(2.8%)。74例心脏穿透性损伤幸存者中有6例(8.2%)。对两组患者进行比较:(1)急诊科死亡与1小时存活者-所有生理参数均可预测预后(P < 0.0001);(2) 1小时存活者与总存活者-无生理参数可预测预后。心肺复苏时间(P = .04)、穿透机制(P < .001)、放血量(P < .006)差异均有统计学意义。心血管呼吸评分呈下降趋势(P = .007)。死亡与总体生存-血压恢复具有预测性(P < 0.006)。逐步logistic回归采用4因素模型,包括无自动通气、到达时无脉搏、损伤严重程度评分bbb45和钝性损伤机制,预测死亡率为99.3%。结论:对于出现骤停需要急诊科开胸的患者,所有参数加上12分钟的心肺复苏时间可以预测死亡率。75%的病人可以排除在急诊科开胸手术之外。急诊对心脏穿透性损伤及部分血管损伤患者应选择性开胸。
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
Surgery
Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
687
审稿时长
64 days
期刊介绍: For 66 years, Surgery has published practical, authoritative information about procedures, clinical advances, and major trends shaping general surgery. Each issue features original scientific contributions and clinical reports. Peer-reviewed articles cover topics in oncology, trauma, gastrointestinal, vascular, and transplantation surgery. The journal also publishes papers from the meetings of its sponsoring societies, the Society of University Surgeons, the Central Surgical Association, and the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons.
×
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
小红书