The Survival Benefit of a Novel Trauma Workflow that Includes Immediate Whole-body Computed Tomography, Surgery, and Interventional Radiology, All in One Trauma Resuscitation Room

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

Related collections

Most cited references 19

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Effect of whole-body CT during trauma resuscitation on survival: a retrospective, multicentre study.

Stefan Huber-Wagner, Rolf Lefering, Lars-Mikael Qvick … (2009)

The number of trauma centres using whole-body CT for early assessment of primary trauma is increasing. There is no evidence to suggest that use of whole-body CT has any effect on the outcome of patients with major trauma. We therefore compared the probability of survival in patients with blunt trauma who had whole-body CT during resuscitation with those who had not. In a retrospective, multicentre study, we used the data recorded in the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society to calculate the probability of survival according to the trauma and injury severity score (TRISS), revised injury severity classification (RISC) score, and standardised mortality ratio (SMR, ratio of recorded to expected mortality) for 4621 patients with blunt trauma given whole-body or non-whole-body CT. 1494 (32%) of 4621 patients were given whole-body CT. Mean age was 42.6 years (SD 20.7), 3364 (73%) were men, and mean injury-severity score was 29.7 (13.0). SMR based on TRISS was 0.745 (95% CI 0.633-0.859) for patients given whole-body CT versus 1.023 (0.909-1.137) for those given non-whole-body CT (p<0.001). SMR based on the RISC score was 0.865 (0.774-0.956) for patients given whole-body CT versus 1.034 (0.959-1.109) for those given non-whole-body CT (p=0.017). The relative reduction in mortality based on TRISS was 25% (14-37) versus 13% (4-23) based on RISC score. Multivariate adjustment for hospital level, year of trauma, and potential centre effects confirmed that whole-body CT is an independent predictor for survival (p

0 comments Cited 150 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The Major Trauma Outcome Study: establishing national norms for trauma care.

H R Champion, W. COPES, W Sacco … (1990)

The Major Trauma Outcome Study (MTOS) is a retrospective descriptive study of injury severity and outcome coordinated through the American College of Surgeons' Committee on Trauma. From 1982 through 1987, 139 North American hospitals submitted demographic, etiologic, injury severity, and outcome data for 80,544 trauma patients. Motor vehicle related injuries were most frequent (34.7%). Twenty-one per cent of patients had penetrating injuries. The overall mortality rate was 9.0%. The mortality rate for direct admissions was strongly related to the presence of serious head injury, 5.0% and 40.0%, when head injuries were less than or equal to AIS (Abbreviated Injury Scale) 3 or greater than or equal to AIS 4, respectively. Survival probability norms use the Revised Trauma Score, Injury Severity Score, patient age, and injury mechanism. Patients with unexpected outcomes were identified and statistical comparisons of actual and expected numbers of survivors made for each institution. Results provide a description of injury and outcome and support evaluation and quality assurance activities.

0 comments Cited 149 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Selective nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury: an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline.

Oscar D Guillamondegui, D Cheng, Ben Zarzuar … (2012)

During the last century, the management of blunt force trauma to the spleen has changed from observation and expectant management in the early part of the 1900s to mainly operative intervention, to the current practice of selective operative and nonoperative management. These issues were first addressed by the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) in the Practice Management Guidelines for Non-operative Management of Blunt Injury to the Liver and Spleen published online in 2003. Since that time, a large volume of literature on these topics has been published requiring a reevaluation of the current EAST guideline. The National Library of Medicine and the National Institute of Health MEDLINE database was searched using Pub Med (www.pubmed.gov). The search was designed to identify English-language citations published after 1996 (the last year included in the previous guideline) using the keywords splenic injury and blunt abdominal trauma. One hundred seventy-six articles were reviewed, of which 125 were used to create the current practice management guideline for the selective nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury. There has been a plethora of literature regarding nonoperative management of blunt splenic injuries published since the original EAST practice management guideline was written. Nonoperative management of blunt splenic injuries is now the treatment modality of choice in hemodynamically stable patients, irrespective of the grade of injury, patient age, or the presence of associated injuries. Its use is associated with a low overall morbidity and mortality when applied to an appropriate patient population. Nonoperative management of blunt splenic injuries should only be considered in an environment that provides capabilities for monitoring, serial clinical evaluations, and has an operating room available for urgent laparotomy. Patients presenting with hemodynamic instability and peritonitis still warrant emergent operative intervention. Intravenous contrast enhanced computed tomographic scan is the diagnostic modality of choice for evaluating blunt splenic injuries. Repeat imaging should be guided by a patient's clinical status. Adjunctive therapies like angiography with embolization are increasingly important adjuncts to nonoperative management of splenic injuries. Despite the explosion of literature on this topic, many questions regarding nonoperative management of blunt splenic injuries remain without conclusive answers in the literature.