与完全REBOA 1区和急诊科开胸相比,部分REBOA 1区与较低的死亡率相关:一项使用主动脉登记的队列研究。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY
Transfusion Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-10 DOI:10.1111/trf.18177
Morgan G Dewey, Ernest E Moore, Lee Anne Ammons, Isabella M Bernhardt, Angela Sauaia, Meghan L Brenner
{"title":"与完全REBOA 1区和急诊科开胸相比,部分REBOA 1区与较低的死亡率相关:一项使用主动脉登记的队列研究。","authors":"Morgan G Dewey, Ernest E Moore, Lee Anne Ammons, Isabella M Bernhardt, Angela Sauaia, Meghan L Brenner","doi":"10.1111/trf.18177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) and emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) are effective methods of aortic occlusion (AO) for life-threatening bleeding; however, complete AO can lead to visceral ischemia. Partial REBOA (P-REBOA) has been proposed as an alternative to the completely occlusive REBOA (C-REBOA) to balance hemorrhage control and perfusion. Using the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma (AORTA) multicenter, observational registry, we tested the hypothesis that P-REBOA resulted in better outcomes compared to EDT and C-REBOA.</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>We queried the 2017-2023 AORTA registry for adults who underwent EDT, C-REBOA, or P-REBOA in the emergency department (ED). Patients with chest penetrating injuries were excluded. We compared mortality, ventilator-free-days (VFD), and ICU-free-days (ICUFD) using survival analysis or generalized linear models to adjust for confounders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 921 patients underwent EDT (n = 613, 66.6%), C-REBOA (n = 224, 24.3%), or P-REBOA (n = 84, 9.1%); 83.1% died. After confounder adjustment, compared to P-REBOA, both C-REBOA and EDT were associated with a lower likelihood of attaining hemodynamic improvement and stability as well as with higher mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR = 1.84; 95% CI: 1.01-1.60 and aHR = 3.32; 95% CI: 1.96-2.78, respectively). EDT patients had less VFD and ICUFD than those undergoing C-REBOA and P-REBOA, but there were no differences between the two endovascular procedures. Among patients who survived >48 h, EDT was more likely to be associated with complications compared to the other two procedures.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>P-REBOA was more likely to be associated with improved hemodynamic stability and reduced mortality compared to C-REBOA and EDT, suggesting this modality may be a better AO procedure for patients with no penetrating thoracic injuries.</p>","PeriodicalId":23266,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion","volume":" ","pages":"S80-S97"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Partial REBOA Zone 1 is associated with lower mortality compared to complete REBOA Zone 1 and emergency department thoracotomy: A cohort study using the AORTA registry.\",\"authors\":\"Morgan G Dewey, Ernest E Moore, Lee Anne Ammons, Isabella M Bernhardt, Angela Sauaia, Meghan L Brenner\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/trf.18177\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) and emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) are effective methods of aortic occlusion (AO) for life-threatening bleeding; however, complete AO can lead to visceral ischemia. Partial REBOA (P-REBOA) has been proposed as an alternative to the completely occlusive REBOA (C-REBOA) to balance hemorrhage control and perfusion. Using the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma (AORTA) multicenter, observational registry, we tested the hypothesis that P-REBOA resulted in better outcomes compared to EDT and C-REBOA.</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>We queried the 2017-2023 AORTA registry for adults who underwent EDT, C-REBOA, or P-REBOA in the emergency department (ED). Patients with chest penetrating injuries were excluded. We compared mortality, ventilator-free-days (VFD), and ICU-free-days (ICUFD) using survival analysis or generalized linear models to adjust for confounders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 921 patients underwent EDT (n = 613, 66.6%), C-REBOA (n = 224, 24.3%), or P-REBOA (n = 84, 9.1%); 83.1% died. After confounder adjustment, compared to P-REBOA, both C-REBOA and EDT were associated with a lower likelihood of attaining hemodynamic improvement and stability as well as with higher mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR = 1.84; 95% CI: 1.01-1.60 and aHR = 3.32; 95% CI: 1.96-2.78, respectively). EDT patients had less VFD and ICUFD than those undergoing C-REBOA and P-REBOA, but there were no differences between the two endovascular procedures. Among patients who survived >48 h, EDT was more likely to be associated with complications compared to the other two procedures.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>P-REBOA was more likely to be associated with improved hemodynamic stability and reduced mortality compared to C-REBOA and EDT, suggesting this modality may be a better AO procedure for patients with no penetrating thoracic injuries.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23266,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transfusion\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"S80-S97\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transfusion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.18177\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.18177","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:复苏血管内球囊阻塞主动脉(REBOA)和急诊科开胸术(EDT)是主动脉阻塞(AO)治疗危及生命出血的有效方法;然而,完全性AO可导致内脏缺血。部分REBOA (P-REBOA)已被提出作为完全闭塞性REBOA (C-REBOA)的替代方案,以平衡出血控制和灌注。使用创伤主动脉闭塞复苏(AORTA)多中心观察登记,我们验证了P-REBOA比EDT和C-REBOA效果更好的假设。研究设计和方法:我们查询了2017-2023年在急诊科(ED)接受EDT、C-REBOA或P-REBOA的成人主动脉登记。排除胸穿伤患者。我们使用生存分析或广义线性模型来调整混杂因素,比较死亡率、无呼吸机天数(VFD)和无icu天数(ICUFD)。结果:总体而言,921例患者接受了EDT (n = 613, 66.6%)、C-REBOA (n = 224, 24.3%)或P-REBOA (n = 84, 9.1%);83.1%死亡。混杂因素校正后,与P-REBOA相比,C-REBOA和EDT获得血流动力学改善和稳定的可能性较低,死亡率较高(校正风险比,aHR = 1.84;95% CI: 1.01-1.60, aHR = 3.32;95% CI分别为1.96-2.78)。EDT患者的VFD和ICUFD低于接受C-REBOA和P-REBOA的患者,但两种血管内手术之间没有差异。在存活48小时的患者中,与其他两种手术相比,EDT更有可能与并发症相关。讨论:与C-REBOA和EDT相比,P-REBOA更有可能改善血流动力学稳定性和降低死亡率,这表明对于没有穿透性胸部损伤的患者,P-REBOA可能是一种更好的AO手术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Partial REBOA Zone 1 is associated with lower mortality compared to complete REBOA Zone 1 and emergency department thoracotomy: A cohort study using the AORTA registry.

Background: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) and emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) are effective methods of aortic occlusion (AO) for life-threatening bleeding; however, complete AO can lead to visceral ischemia. Partial REBOA (P-REBOA) has been proposed as an alternative to the completely occlusive REBOA (C-REBOA) to balance hemorrhage control and perfusion. Using the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma (AORTA) multicenter, observational registry, we tested the hypothesis that P-REBOA resulted in better outcomes compared to EDT and C-REBOA.

Study design and methods: We queried the 2017-2023 AORTA registry for adults who underwent EDT, C-REBOA, or P-REBOA in the emergency department (ED). Patients with chest penetrating injuries were excluded. We compared mortality, ventilator-free-days (VFD), and ICU-free-days (ICUFD) using survival analysis or generalized linear models to adjust for confounders.

Results: Overall, 921 patients underwent EDT (n = 613, 66.6%), C-REBOA (n = 224, 24.3%), or P-REBOA (n = 84, 9.1%); 83.1% died. After confounder adjustment, compared to P-REBOA, both C-REBOA and EDT were associated with a lower likelihood of attaining hemodynamic improvement and stability as well as with higher mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR = 1.84; 95% CI: 1.01-1.60 and aHR = 3.32; 95% CI: 1.96-2.78, respectively). EDT patients had less VFD and ICUFD than those undergoing C-REBOA and P-REBOA, but there were no differences between the two endovascular procedures. Among patients who survived >48 h, EDT was more likely to be associated with complications compared to the other two procedures.

Discussion: P-REBOA was more likely to be associated with improved hemodynamic stability and reduced mortality compared to C-REBOA and EDT, suggesting this modality may be a better AO procedure for patients with no penetrating thoracic injuries.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Transfusion
Transfusion 医学-血液学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
20.70%
发文量
426
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: TRANSFUSION is the foremost publication in the world for new information regarding transfusion medicine. Written by and for members of AABB and other health-care workers, TRANSFUSION reports on the latest technical advances, discusses opposing viewpoints regarding controversial issues, and presents key conference proceedings. In addition to blood banking and transfusion medicine topics, TRANSFUSION presents submissions concerning patient blood management, tissue transplantation and hematopoietic, cellular, and gene therapies.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信