Grahya Guntur, J. Dubose, Tiffany K. Bee, T. Fabian, J. Morrison, D. Skarupa, K. Inaba, Rishi Kundi, T. Scalea, D. Feliciano
{"title":"Contemporary Management of Axillosubclavian Arterial Injuries Using Data from the AAST PROOVIT Registry","authors":"Grahya Guntur, J. Dubose, Tiffany K. Bee, T. Fabian, J. Morrison, D. Skarupa, K. Inaba, Rishi Kundi, T. Scalea, D. Feliciano","doi":"10.26676/jevtm.v5i2.201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Endovascular repair has emerged as a viable repair option for axillosubclavian arterial injuries in select patients; however, further study of contemporary outcomes is warranted. \nMethods: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment (PROOVIT) registry was used to identify patients with axillo-subclavian arterial injuries from 2013 – 2019. Demographics and outcomes were compared between patients undergoing endovascular repair versus open repair. \nResults: 167 patients were identified, with intervention required in 107 (64.1%). Among these, 24 patients underwent open damage control surgery (primary amputation = 3, ligation = 17, temporary vascular shunt = 4). The remaining 83 patients (91.6% male; mean age 26.0 ± 16) underwent either endovascular repair (36, 43.4%) or open repair (47, 56.6%). Patients managed with definitive endovascular or open repair had similar demographics and presentation, with the only exception that endovascular repair was more commonly employed for traumatic pseudoaneurysms (p=0.004). Endovascular repair was associated with lower 24-hour transfusion requirements (p=0.012), but otherwise the two groups were similar with regards to in-hospital outcomes. \nConclusion: Endovascular repair is now employed in > 40% of axillo-subclavian arterial injuries undergoing repair at initial operation and is associated with lower 24 hour transfusion requirements, but otherwise outcomes are comparable to open repair.","PeriodicalId":41233,"journal":{"name":"Journal of EndoVascular Resuscitation and Trauma Management","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of EndoVascular Resuscitation and Trauma Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26676/jevtm.v5i2.201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Background: Endovascular repair has emerged as a viable repair option for axillosubclavian arterial injuries in select patients; however, further study of contemporary outcomes is warranted.
Methods: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment (PROOVIT) registry was used to identify patients with axillo-subclavian arterial injuries from 2013 – 2019. Demographics and outcomes were compared between patients undergoing endovascular repair versus open repair.
Results: 167 patients were identified, with intervention required in 107 (64.1%). Among these, 24 patients underwent open damage control surgery (primary amputation = 3, ligation = 17, temporary vascular shunt = 4). The remaining 83 patients (91.6% male; mean age 26.0 ± 16) underwent either endovascular repair (36, 43.4%) or open repair (47, 56.6%). Patients managed with definitive endovascular or open repair had similar demographics and presentation, with the only exception that endovascular repair was more commonly employed for traumatic pseudoaneurysms (p=0.004). Endovascular repair was associated with lower 24-hour transfusion requirements (p=0.012), but otherwise the two groups were similar with regards to in-hospital outcomes.
Conclusion: Endovascular repair is now employed in > 40% of axillo-subclavian arterial injuries undergoing repair at initial operation and is associated with lower 24 hour transfusion requirements, but otherwise outcomes are comparable to open repair.