Literature DB >> 23301981

Remote damage control resuscitation and the Solstrand Conference: defining the need, the language, and a way forward.

Robert T Gerhardt1, Geir Strandenes, Andrew P Cap, Francisco J Rentas, Elon Glassberg, Jeff Mott, Michael A Dubick, Philip C Spinella.   

Abstract

Damage control resuscitation (DCR) is emerging as a standard practice in civilian and military trauma care. Primary objectives include resolution of immediate life threats followed by optimization of physiological status in the perioperative period. To accomplish this, DCR employs a unique hypotensive-hemostatic resuscitation strategy that avoids traditional crystalloid intravenous fluids in favor of early blood component use in ratios mimicking whole blood. The presence of uncontrolled major hemorrhage (UMH) coupled with a delay in access to hemostatic surgical intervention remains a primary contributor to preventable death in both combat and in many domestic settings, including rural areas and disaster sites. As a result, civilian and military emergency care leaders throughout the world have sought a means to project DCR principles forward of the traditional trauma resuscitation bay, into such remote environments as disaster scenes, rural health facilities, and the contemporary battlefield. After reflecting on experiences from past conflicts, defining current capability gaps, and examining available and potential solutions, a strategy for "remote damage control resuscitation" (RDCR) has been proposed. In order for RDCR to progress from concept to clinical strategy, it will be necessary to define existing gaps in knowledge and clinical capability; develop a lexicon so that investigators and operators may understand each other; establish coherent research and development agendas; and execute comprehensive investigations designed to predict, diagnose, and mitigate the consequences of hemorrhagic shock and acute traumatic coagulopathy before they become irreversible. This article seeks to introduce the concept of RDCR; to reinforce the importance of identifying and optimally managing UMH and the resulting shock state as part of a comprehensive approach to out-of-hospital stabilization and en route care; and to propose investigational strategies to enable the development and broad implementation of RDCR principles.
© 2013 American Association of Blood Banks.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23301981     DOI: 10.1111/trf.12030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transfusion        ISSN: 0041-1132            Impact factor:   3.157


  9 in total

Review 1.  Advances in damage control resuscitation and surgery: implications on the organization of future military field forces.

Authors:  Homer Tien; Andrew Beckett; Naisan Garraway; Max Talbot; Dylan Pannell; Thamer Alabbasi
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 2.  Remote Damage Control Resuscitation in Austere Environments.

Authors:  Ronald Chang; Brian J Eastridge; John B Holcomb
Journal:  Wilderness Environ Med       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.518

3.  Multicenter observational prehospital resuscitation on helicopter study.

Authors:  John B Holcomb; Michael D Swartz; Stacia M DeSantis; Thomas J Greene; Erin E Fox; Deborah M Stein; Eileen M Bulger; Jeffrey D Kerby; Michael Goodman; Martin A Schreiber; Martin D Zielinski; Terence O'Keeffe; Kenji Inaba; Jeffrey S Tomasek; Jeanette M Podbielski; Savitri N Appana; Misung Yi; Charles E Wade
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 3.313

4.  Prehospital Whole Blood Transfusion Programs in Norway.

Authors:  Christopher Kalhagen Bjerkvig; Geir Strandenes; Tor Hervig; Geir Arne Sunde; Torunn Oveland Apelseth
Journal:  Transfus Med Hemother       Date:  2021-10-22       Impact factor: 3.747

5.  Trauma hemostasis and oxygenation research position paper on remote damage control resuscitation: definitions, current practice, and knowledge gaps.

Authors:  Donald H Jenkins; Joseph F Rappold; John F Badloe; Olle Berséus; Lorne Blackbourne; Karim H Brohi; Frank K Butler; Andrew P Cap; Mitchell Jay Cohen; Ross Davenport; Marc DePasquale; Heidi Doughty; Elon Glassberg; Tor Hervig; Timothy J Hooper; Rosemary Kozar; Marc Maegele; Ernest E Moore; Alan Murdock; Paul M Ness; Shibani Pati; Todd Rasmussen; Anne Sailliol; Martin A Schreiber; Geir Arne Sunde; Leo M G van de Watering; Kevin R Ward; Richard B Weiskopf; Nathan J White; Geir Strandenes; Philip C Spinella
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 3.454

6.  Primary hemostatic capacity of whole blood: a comprehensive analysis of pathogen reduction and refrigeration effects over time.

Authors:  Heather F Pidcoke; Steve J McFaul; Anand K Ramasubramanian; Bijaya K Parida; Alex G Mora; Chriselda G Fedyk; Krystal K Valdez-Delgado; Robbie K Montgomery; Kristin M Reddoch; Armando C Rodriguez; James K Aden; John A Jones; Ron S Bryant; Michael R Scherer; Heather L Reddy; Raymond P Goodrich; Andrew P Cap
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 3.157

Review 7.  Fluid resuscitation in haemorrhagic shock in combat casualties.

Authors:  Parli R Ravi; Bipin Puri
Journal:  Disaster Mil Med       Date:  2017-01-17

8.  Recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) in refractory haemorrhage for non-haemophiliacs: an eleven-year single-centre experience.

Authors:  Nurfatin Mohd Shah; Soon Eu Chong; Syahirah Mohamed Yusoff; Mohd Zulfakar Mazlan; Khairul Bariah Johan; Nizuwan Azman; Jo Anne Lim; Siti Mardhiana Mohamad; Siti Salmah Noordin; Zainab Abdul Ghaffar; Mohd Hasyizan Hassan; Muhammad Azrul Zabidi; Nur Arzuar Abdul Rahim
Journal:  BMC Hematol       Date:  2018-11-23

Review 9.  Pre-hospital transfusion of red blood cells. Part 2: A systematic review of treatment effects on outcomes.

Authors:  Elisabeth C van Turenhout; Sebastiaan M Bossers; Stephan A Loer; Georgios F Giannakopoulos; Lothar A Schwarte; Patrick Schober
Journal:  Transfus Med       Date:  2020-01-05       Impact factor: 2.019

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.