14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Hypotensive Resuscitation among Trauma Patients

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          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

          Hemorrhagic shock is a principal cause of death among trauma patients within the first 24 hours after injury. Optimal fluid resuscitation strategies have been examined for nearly a century, more recently with several randomized controlled trials. Hypotensive resuscitation, also called permissive hypotension, is a resuscitation strategy that uses limited fluids and blood products during the early stages of treatment for hemorrhagic shock. A lower-than-normal blood pressure is maintained until operative control of the bleeding can occur. The randomized controlled trials examining restricted fluid resuscitation have demonstrated that aggressive fluid resuscitation in the prehospital and hospital setting leads to more complications than hypotensive resuscitation, with disparate findings on the survival benefit. Since the populations studied in each randomized controlled trial are slightly different, as is the timing of intervention and targeted vitals, there is still a need for a large, multicenter trial that can examine the benefit of hypotensive resuscitation in both blunt and penetrating trauma patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Immediate versus delayed fluid resuscitation for hypotensive patients with penetrating torso injuries.

          Fluid resuscitation may be detrimental when given before bleeding is controlled in patients with trauma. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of delaying fluid resuscitation until the time of operative intervention in hypotensive patients with penetrating injuries to the torso. We conducted a prospective trial comparing immediate and delayed fluid resuscitation in 598 adults with penetrating torso injuries who presented with a pre-hospital systolic blood pressure of < or = 90 mm Hg. The study setting was a city with a single centralized system of pre-hospital emergency care and a single receiving facility for patients with major trauma. Patients assigned to the immediate-resuscitation group received standard fluid resuscitation before they reached the hospital and in the trauma center, and those assigned to the delayed-resuscitation group received intravenous cannulation but no fluid resuscitation until they reached the operating room. Among the 289 patients who received delayed fluid resuscitation, 203 (70 percent) survived and were discharged from the hospital, as compared with 193 of the 309 patients (62 percent) who received immediate fluid resuscitation (P = 0.04). The mean estimated intraoperative blood loss was similar in the two groups. Among the 238 patients in the delayed-resuscitation group who survived to the postoperative period, 55 (23 percent) had one or more complications (adult respiratory distress syndrome, sepsis syndrome, acute renal failure, coagulopathy, wound infection, and pneumonia), as compared with 69 of the 227 patients (30 percent) in the immediate-resuscitation group (P = 0.08). The duration of hospitalization was shorter in the delayed-resuscitation group. For hypotensive patients with penetrating torso injuries, delay of aggressive fluid resuscitation until operative intervention improves the outcome.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Grading strength of recommendations and quality of evidence in clinical guidelines: report from an american college of chest physicians task force.

            While grading the strength of recommendations and the quality of underlying evidence enhances the usefulness of clinical guidelines, the profusion of guideline grading systems undermines the value of the grading exercise. An American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) task force formulated the criteria for a grading system to be utilized in all ACCP guidelines that included simplicity and transparency, explicitness of methodology, and consistency with current methodological approaches to the grading process. The working group examined currently available systems, and ultimately modified an approach formulated by the international GRADE group. The grading scheme classifies recommendations as strong (grade 1) or weak (grade 2), according to the balance among benefits, risks, burdens, and possibly cost, and the degree of confidence in estimates of benefits, risks, and burdens. The system classifies quality of evidence as high (grade A), moderate (grade B), or low (grade C) according to factors that include the study design, the consistency of the results, and the directness of the evidence. For all future ACCP guidelines, The College has adopted a simple, transparent approach to grading recommendations that is consistent with current developments in the field. The trend toward uniformity of approaches to grading will enhance the usefulness of practice guidelines for clinicians.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Management of bleeding and coagulopathy following major trauma: an updated European guideline

              Introduction Evidence-based recommendations are needed to guide the acute management of the bleeding trauma patient. When these recommendations are implemented patient outcomes may be improved. Methods The multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma was formed in 2005 with the aim of developing a guideline for the management of bleeding following severe injury. This document represents an updated version of the guideline published by the group in 2007 and updated in 2010. Recommendations were formulated using a nominal group process, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) hierarchy of evidence and based on a systematic review of published literature. Results Key changes encompassed in this version of the guideline include new recommendations on the appropriate use of vasopressors and inotropic agents, and reflect an awareness of the growing number of patients in the population at large treated with antiplatelet agents and/or oral anticoagulants. The current guideline also includes recommendations and a discussion of thromboprophylactic strategies for all patients following traumatic injury. The most significant addition is a new section that discusses the need for every institution to develop, implement and adhere to an evidence-based clinical protocol to manage traumatically injured patients. The remaining recommendations have been re-evaluated and graded based on literature published since the last edition of the guideline. Consideration was also given to changes in clinical practice that have taken place during this time period as a result of both new evidence and changes in the general availability of relevant agents and technologies. Conclusions A comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to trauma care and mechanisms with which to ensure that established protocols are consistently implemented will ensure a uniform and high standard of care across Europe and beyond. Please see related letter by Morel et al http://ccforum.com/content/17/4/442
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Biomed Res Int
                Biomed Res Int
                BMRI
                BioMed Research International
                Hindawi Publishing Corporation
                2314-6133
                2314-6141
                2016
                9 August 2016
                : 2016
                : 8901938
                Affiliations
                1Trauma Services Department, The Medical Center of Plano, 3901 W. 15th Street, Plano, TX 75075, USA
                2Department of Trauma Research, Medical Center of Plano, 3901 W. 15th Street, Plano, TX 75075, USA
                3Department of Trauma Research, Swedish Medical Center, 501 E. Hampden Avenue, Englewood, CO 80113, USA
                4Department of Trauma Research, St. Anthony Hospital, 11600 W. 2nd Place, Lakewood, CO 80228, USA
                5Department of Trauma Research, Penrose Hospital, 2222 N. Nevada Avenue, Colorado Springs, CO 80907, USA
                6Trauma Services Department, Swedish Medical Center, 501 E. Hampden Avenue, Englewood, CO 80113, USA
                7Rocky Vista University, 8401 S. Chambers Road, Parker, CO 80134, USA
                8Trauma Services Department, St. Anthony Hospital, 11600 W. 2nd Place, Lakewood, CO 80228, USA
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Aristomenis K. Exadaktylos

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3685-314X
                Article
                10.1155/2016/8901938
                4993927
                27595109
                8657b597-1258-47f1-83ee-aeb778fc38d0
                Copyright © 2016 Matthew M. Carrick et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 15 June 2016
                : 19 July 2016
                Categories
                Review Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article