A 6-year case series of resuscitative thoracotomies performed by a helicopter emergency medical service in a mixed urban and rural area with a comparison of blunt versus penetrating trauma.

Phillip Almond, Sarah Morton, Matthew OMeara, Neal Durge
{"title":"A 6-year case series of resuscitative thoracotomies performed by a helicopter emergency medical service in a mixed urban and rural area with a comparison of blunt versus penetrating trauma.","authors":"Phillip Almond,&nbsp;Sarah Morton,&nbsp;Matthew OMeara,&nbsp;Neal Durge","doi":"10.1186/s13049-022-00997-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is an intervention that can be performed in the prehospital setting for relieving cardiac tamponade and/or obtaining vascular control of suspected sub-diaphragmatic haemorrhage in patients in traumatic cardiac arrest. The aim of this retrospective case study is to compare the rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in RTs performed for both penetrating and blunt trauma over 6 years in a mixed urban and rural environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The electronic records of a single helicopter emergency medical service were reviewed between 1st June 2015 and 31st May 2021 for RTs. Anonymised data including demographics were extracted for relevant cases. Data were analysed with independent t-tests and Χ<sup>2</sup> tests. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-four RTs were preformed within the 6 years (26 for blunt trauma). Eleven ROSCs were achieved (nine blunt, two penetrating) but no patient survived to discharge. In contrast to RTs for penetrating trauma, twelve of the RTs for blunt trauma had a cardiac output present on arrival of the prehospital team (p = 0.01). Two patients had an RT performed in a helicopter (one ROSC) and two on a helipad (both achieving ROSC), likely due to the longer transfer times seen in a more rural setting. Four of the RTs for blunt trauma (15%) were found to have a cardiac tamponade versus seven (39%) of the penetrating trauma RTs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Prehospital RT remains a procedure with low rates of survival but may facilitate a ROSC to allow patients to reach hospital and surgery, particularly when distances to hospitals are greater. A higher-than-expected rate of cardiac tamponade was seen in RTs for blunt trauma, although not caused by a right ventricular wound but instead due to underlying vessel damage.</p>","PeriodicalId":501057,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8793242/pdf/","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-022-00997-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Background: Resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is an intervention that can be performed in the prehospital setting for relieving cardiac tamponade and/or obtaining vascular control of suspected sub-diaphragmatic haemorrhage in patients in traumatic cardiac arrest. The aim of this retrospective case study is to compare the rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in RTs performed for both penetrating and blunt trauma over 6 years in a mixed urban and rural environment.

Methods: The electronic records of a single helicopter emergency medical service were reviewed between 1st June 2015 and 31st May 2021 for RTs. Anonymised data including demographics were extracted for relevant cases. Data were analysed with independent t-tests and Χ2 tests. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: Forty-four RTs were preformed within the 6 years (26 for blunt trauma). Eleven ROSCs were achieved (nine blunt, two penetrating) but no patient survived to discharge. In contrast to RTs for penetrating trauma, twelve of the RTs for blunt trauma had a cardiac output present on arrival of the prehospital team (p = 0.01). Two patients had an RT performed in a helicopter (one ROSC) and two on a helipad (both achieving ROSC), likely due to the longer transfer times seen in a more rural setting. Four of the RTs for blunt trauma (15%) were found to have a cardiac tamponade versus seven (39%) of the penetrating trauma RTs.

Conclusion: Prehospital RT remains a procedure with low rates of survival but may facilitate a ROSC to allow patients to reach hospital and surgery, particularly when distances to hospitals are greater. A higher-than-expected rate of cardiac tamponade was seen in RTs for blunt trauma, although not caused by a right ventricular wound but instead due to underlying vessel damage.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

由直升机紧急医疗服务在城市和农村混合地区进行的为期6年的复苏开胸手术病例系列,并比较钝性和穿透性创伤。
背景:复苏开胸术(RT)是一种可以在院前进行的干预措施,用于缓解心包填塞和/或获得外伤性心脏骤停患者疑似膈下出血的血管控制。本回顾性病例研究的目的是比较6年来在城市和农村混合环境中对穿透性和钝性创伤进行RTs的自发循环(ROSC)恢复率。方法:回顾2015年6月1日至2021年5月31日期间单一直升机紧急医疗服务的电子记录。从相关案例中提取了包括人口统计在内的匿名数据。数据分析采用独立t检验和Χ2检验。结果:6年内共进行了44例rt(其中钝性创伤26例)。实现了11例ROSCs(9例钝性,2例穿透性),但没有患者存活至出院。与穿透性创伤的即时治疗相比,钝性创伤的即时治疗中有12例在院前小组到达时出现心输出量(p = 0.01)。两名患者在直升机上进行了RT(一名ROSC),两名患者在直升机停机坪上进行了RT(都实现了ROSC),可能是由于在农村环境中看到的转移时间较长。钝性创伤RTs中有4例(15%)发现有心脏填塞,而穿透性创伤RTs中有7例(39%)。结论:院前放疗仍然是一种生存率较低的手术,但可以促进ROSC,使患者能够到达医院和手术,特别是当距离医院较远时。在钝性创伤的RTs中,心脏填塞率高于预期,尽管不是由右心室伤口引起的,而是由于潜在的血管损伤引起的。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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