Joseph J DuBose1, Thomas M Scalea, Megan Brenner, Dimitra Skiada, Kenji Inaba, Jeremy Cannon, Laura Moore, John Holcomb, David Turay, Cassra N Arbabi, Andrew Kirkpatrick, James Xiao, David Skarupa, Nathaniel Poulin. 1. From the David Grant Medical Center (J.J.D.), University of California-Davis, Davis, California; Department of Surgery (T.M.S., M.B.), R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland; Los Angeles County + University of Southern California Hospital (D.S., K.I.), Los Angeles, California; San Antonio Military Medical Center (J.C.), United States Army Institute of Surgical Research, San Antonio, Texas; University of Texas Health Sciences Center-Houston (L.M., J.H.), Houston, Texas; Loma Linda University Medical Center (D.T., C.N.A.), Loma Linda, California; University of Calgary (A.K., J.X.), Calgary, Alberta, Canada; University of Florida-Jacksonville (D.S.), Jacksonville, Florida; and East Carolina Medical Center (N.P.), New Bern, North Carolina.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Aortic occlusion (AO) for resuscitation in traumatic shock remains controversial. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) offers an emerging alternative. METHODS: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry prospectively identified trauma patients requiring AO from eight ACS Level 1 centers. Presentation, intervention, and outcome variables were collected and analyzed to compare REBOA and open AO. RESULTS: From November 2013 to February 2015, 114 AO patients were captured (REBOA, 46; open AO, 68); 80.7% were male, and 62.3% were blunt injured. Aortic occlusion occurred in the emergency department (73.7%) or the operating room (26.3%). Hemodynamic improvement after AO was observed in 62.3% [REBOA, 67.4%; open OA, 61.8%); 36.0% achieving stability (systolic blood pressure consistently >90 mm Hg, >5 minutes); REBOA, 22 of 46 (47.8%); open OA, 19 of 68 (27.9%); p =0.014]. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) access was femoral cut-down (50%); US guided (10.9%) and percutaneous without imaging (28.3%). Deployment was achieved in Zones I (78.6%), II (2.4%), and III (19.0%). A second AO attempt was required in 9.6% [REBOA, 2 of 46 (4.3%); open OA, 9 of 68 (13.2%)]. Complications of REBOA were uncommon (pseudoaneurysm, 2.1%; embolism, 4.3%; limb ischemia, 0%). There was no difference in time to successful AO between REBOA and open procedures (REBOA, 6.6 ± 5.6 minutes; open OA, 7.2 ± 15.1; p = 0.842). Overall survival was 21.1% (24 of 114), with no significant difference between REBOA and open AO with regard to mortality [REBOA, 28.2% (13 of 46); open OA, 16.1% (11 of 68); p = 0.120]. CONCLUSION: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta has emerged as a viable alternative to open AO in centers that have developed this capability. Further maturation of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery database is required to better elucidate optimal indications and outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management study, level IV.
INTRODUCTION:Aortic occlusion (AO) for resuscitation in traumatic shock remains controversial. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) offers an emerging alternative. METHODS: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry prospectively identified traumapatients requiring AO from eight ACS Level 1 centers. Presentation, intervention, and outcome variables were collected and analyzed to compare REBOA and open AO. RESULTS: From November 2013 to February 2015, 114 AOpatients were captured (REBOA, 46; open AO, 68); 80.7% were male, and 62.3% were blunt injured. Aortic occlusion occurred in the emergency department (73.7%) or the operating room (26.3%). Hemodynamic improvement after AO was observed in 62.3% [REBOA, 67.4%; open OA, 61.8%); 36.0% achieving stability (systolic blood pressure consistently >90 mm Hg, >5 minutes); REBOA, 22 of 46 (47.8%); open OA, 19 of 68 (27.9%); p =0.014]. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) access was femoral cut-down (50%); US guided (10.9%) and percutaneous without imaging (28.3%). Deployment was achieved in Zones I (78.6%), II (2.4%), and III (19.0%). A second AO attempt was required in 9.6% [REBOA, 2 of 46 (4.3%); open OA, 9 of 68 (13.2%)]. Complications of REBOA were uncommon (pseudoaneurysm, 2.1%; embolism, 4.3%; limb ischemia, 0%). There was no difference in time to successful AO between REBOA and open procedures (REBOA, 6.6 ± 5.6 minutes; open OA, 7.2 ± 15.1; p = 0.842). Overall survival was 21.1% (24 of 114), with no significant difference between REBOA and open AO with regard to mortality [REBOA, 28.2% (13 of 46); open OA, 16.1% (11 of 68); p = 0.120]. CONCLUSION: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta has emerged as a viable alternative to open AO in centers that have developed this capability. Further maturation of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery database is required to better elucidate optimal indications and outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management study, level IV.
Authors: M Austin Johnson; Timothy K Williams; Sarah-Ashley E Ferencz; Anders J Davidson; Rachel M Russo; William T O'Brien; Joseph M Galante; J Kevin Grayson; Lucas P Neff Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Ryan P Dumas; Daniel N Holena; Brian P Smith; Daniel Jafari; Mark J Seamon; Patrick M Reilly; Zaffer Qasim; Jeremy W Cannon Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2018-09-18 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Ronald Chang; Erin E Fox; Thomas J Greene; Brian J Eastridge; Ramyar Gilani; Kevin K Chung; Stacia M DeSantis; Joseph J DuBose; Jeffrey S Tomasek; Gerald R Fortuna; Valerie G Sams; S Rob Todd; Jeanette M Podbielski; Charles E Wade; John B Holcomb Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Philip J Wasicek; Shiming Yang; William A Teeter; Peter Hu; Deborah M Stein; Thomas M Scalea; Megan L Brenner Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2018-07-21 Impact factor: 3.693
Authors: Aaron M Williams; Umar F Bhatti; Isabel S Dennahy; Nathan J Graham; Vahagn C Nikolian; Kiril Chtraklin; Panpan Chang; Jing Zhou; Ben E Biesterveld; Jonathan Eliason; Hasan B Alam Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Carlos A Ordoñez; Michael W Parra; Yaset Caicedo; Natalia Padilla; Edison Angamarca; José Julián Serna; Fernando Rodríguez-Holguín; Alberto García; Alexander Salcedo; Luis Fernando Pino; Adolfo González-Hadad; Mario Alain Herrera; Laureano Quintero; Fabian Hernández; María Josefa Franco; Gonzalo Aristizábal; Luis Eduardo Toro; Mónica Guzmán-Rodríguez; Federico Coccolini; Ricardo Ferrada; Rao Ivatury Journal: Colomb Med (Cali) Date: 2021-04-27