Article

Reanalysis of prehospital intravenous fluid administration in patients with penetrating truncal injury and field hypotension

Department of Surgery, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California 90509, USA.
The American surgeon (Impact Factor: 0.92). 11/2007; 73(10):1027-30.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In 1994, Bickell et al. published a prospective study recommending restricting prehospital intravenous fluids (IVF) to less than 100 cc in patients with penetrating truncal injuries and field hypotension, reporting a 30 per cent mortality with IVF restriction and a 38 per cent mortality with liberal IVF use. However, since this study, few papers have investigated whether emergency medical systems (EMS) adhere to these IVF guidelines. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a policy of IVF restriction is being followed and whether the volume of prehospital and emergency department (ED) IVF affects outcome in patients with penetrating truncal injury and field hypotension at a Level I trauma center in Los Angeles County. A retrospective analysis of a trauma database from 1998 to 2005 of all patients with penetrating truncal injury and field hypotension (systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg) was performed. Multiple variables, including originating EMS agency, mechanism of injury, transport time, Injury Severity Score, field and ED vital signs, and IVF volume infused, complications, and mortality were compared. One hundred ninety-four patients with a median age of 26 years with penetrating truncal injury and field hypotension were analyzed. The most common mechanisms of injury were gunshot (73%) and stab (22%) wounds. The median field systolic blood pressure was 80 mm Hg. The median transport time was 11 minutes. The median prehospital IVF was 500 cc with only 25 per cent receiving less than 100 cc of IVF. There were no differences in the amount of IVF administered by the degree of field hypotension or by originating EMS agency. Median ED IVF was 1000 cc. The overall mortality rate was 25 per cent. When a comparison was made of those receiving less than 100 cc prehospital IVF in comparison to those receiving greater than 100 cc, there were no differences detected with respect to median age, systolic blood pressure, Injury Severity Score, transport time, or morbidity rate. The mortality rate was 21 per cent in the group that received greater than 100 cc of IVF in comparison to a 37 per cent mortality rate in the group that received less than 100 cc IVF (P = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, after adjusting for Trauma Injury Severity Score, there were no differences in survival by the amount of prehospital or ED IVF administered. It appears that the recommendations of IVF restriction for patients with penetrating truncal injuries and field hypotension are not being followed by Los Angeles County EMS. There were no differences in survival with respect to the amount of prehospital or ED IVF. Given the retrospective nature of this study, further investigation is needed to define the role of prehospital IVF resuscitation in these patients.

0 Followers
 · 
69 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Severe bleeding as a result of trauma frequently leads to poor outcome by means of direct or delayed mechanisms. Prehospital fluid therapy is still regarded as the main option of primary treatment in many rescue situations. Our study aimed to assess the influence of prehospital fluid replacement on the posttraumatic course of severely injured patients in a retrospective analysis of matched pairs. We reviewed data from 35,664 patients recorded in the Trauma Registry of the German Society for Trauma Surgery (DGU). The following patients were selected: patients having an Injury Severity Score >16 points, who were ≥16 years of age, with trauma, excluding those with craniocerebral injuries, who were admitted directly to the participating hospitals from the accident site. All patients had recorded values for replaced volume and blood pressure, hemoglobin concentration, and units of packed red blood cells given. The patients were matched based on similar blood pressure characteristics, age groups, and type of accident to create pairs. Pairs were subdivided into two groups based on the volumes infused prior to hospitalization: group 1: 0-1500 (low), group 2: ≥2000 mL (high) volume. We identified 1351 pairs consistent with the inclusion criteria. Patients in group 2 received significantly more packed red blood cells (group 1: 6.9 units, group 2: 9.2 units; P=0.001), they had a significantly reduced capacity of blood coagulation (prothrombin ratio: group 1: 72%, group 2: 61.4%; P≤0.001), and a lower hemoglobin value on arrival at hospital (group 1: 10.6 mg/dL, group 2: 9.1 mg/dL; P≤0.001). The number of ICU-free days concerning the first 30 days after trauma was significantly higher in group 1 (group 1: 11.5 d, group 2: 10.1 d; P≤0.001). By comparison, the rate of sepsis was significantly lower in the first group (group 1: 13.8%, group 2: 18.6%; P=0.002); the same applies to organ failure (group 1: 36.0%, group 2: 39.2%; P≤0.001). The high amounts of intravenous fluid replacement was related to early traumatic coagulopathy, organ failure, and sepsis rate.
    Journal of Emergencies Trauma and Shock 04/2011; 4(4):465-71. DOI:10.4103/0974-2700.86630
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Definitive management of the exsanguinating patient continues to challenge providers in multiple specialties. Significant hemorrhage may be encountered in a variety of patient care circumstances. Over the past two decades, the vast majority of data and evidence regarding transfusion in the exsanguinating patient has been based upon the trauma literature, and a large amount of recent research has investigated this subject area. In addition to the care of trauma patients, the data which have emerged can also be extrapolated to the treatment of nontrauma patients undergoing transfusion for major hemorrhage. The concept of massive transfusion is an evolving paradigm, and numerous investigations have challenged old principles while creating new controversies. The current review will examine the latest developments in the management of patients with profound hemorrhage. The challenges of dealing with the "lethal triad" will be discussed, as will the various aspects of damage control and hemostatic resuscitation. The latest literature and controversy regarding massive transfusions and massive transfusion protocols will be elucidated with inclusion of data from recent military experiences. Finally, adjuncts including the most recent advances in hemorrhage control, identification of early predictors for massive transfusion, and utilization of pharmacologic and complementary factor agent therapy will be discussed.
    Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 07/2011; 28(1). DOI:10.1177/0885066611403273 · 7.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Severe bleeding after trauma frequently leads to a poor outcome. Prehospital fluid replacement therapy is regarded as an important primary treatment option. Our study aimed to assess the influence of prehospital fluid replacement therapy on the post-traumatic course of severely injured patients in a retrospective analysis of matched pairs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data of 51,425 patients of the Trauma Registry of the German Society for Trauma Surgery were analysed. The following patients were included: Injury Severity Score≥16 points, primary admission, age≥16 years, no isolated brain injury, transfusion of at least one unit of packed red blood cells (pRBC), systolic blood pressure≥60mmHg at the accident site. The patients were divided into two groups according to the following matched-pair criteria (low-volume: 0-1500ml prehospital volume replaced; high-volume: ≥1501ml prehospital volume): intubation at the accident site (yes/no), time from injury to hospital±10min., means of rescue (emergency helicopter, MICU), Abbreviated Injury Scale (body regions), injury year, systolic blood pressure and age (years). All patients were managed by an emergency doctor at the accident site. RESULTS: A total of 948 patients in each group met the inclusion criteria. Increasing replacement volume was associated with an increased need for transfusion (pRBCs: low-volume: 7 units, high-volume: 8.3 units; p<0.001) and a reduced ability to coagulate (prothrombin ratio (PR): low-volume: 68%, high-volume: 61.5%; p<0.001). Patients in shock (systolic BP<90mmHg) upon admission to the hospital were equally in both groups (25.6%; p=0.98). Significantly higher lethality was observed in cases of increasing volume (low-volume: 22.7%, high-volume: 27.6%; p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Excessive prehospital fluid replacement leads to an increased mortality rate. The results of this study support the concept of restrained volume replacement in the prehospital treatment of patients with severe trauma.
    Injury 02/2012; 44(5). DOI:10.1016/j.injury.2012.02.004 · 2.46 Impact Factor
Show more