• Hiroyuki Otsuka, Toshiki Sato, Keiji Sakurai, Hiromichi Aoki, Takeshi Yamagiwa, Shinichi Iizuka, and Sadaki Inokuchi.
• Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara-City, Kanagawa 259-1193, Japan. Electronic address: hirootsu@is.icc.u-tokai.ac.jp.
• Injury. 2018 Feb 1; 49 (2): 226-229.

IntroductionRecently, trauma management has been markedly improved with interventional radiology (IVR) and damage-control strategies. However, the indications for its use in hemodynamically unstable patients with severe trauma remains unclear. In some cases, IVR may be more effective than surgery for damage-control hemostasis; however, performing IVR in life-threatening trauma settings is challenging. To address this, we practiced and evaluated a trauma-management system with emergency physicians who trained for both severe trauma management, and techniques of surgery and IVR.Materials And MethodsAmong the 1822 patients with severe trauma admitted between October 2014 and December 2016, 201 underwent emergency surgery or IVR. Among these, 16 patients whose systolic blood pressure was ≤90 mmHg, without improvement following primary resuscitation, and whose first intervention was IVR, were analyzed. We retrospectively evaluated the admission characteristics, IVR-related characteristics, and prognoses, and compared several parameters before and after IVR.ResultsThis study included 10 men and 6 women (median age: 46 years). IVR was performed for 10 pelvic fractures; five liver-, one splenic-, and one renal injury; and one transection each of the external carotid-, vertebral-, axillosubclavian-, intercostal-, and lumbar arteries. The mean times from the patient arrival, and diagnosis to the start of IVR were 56.3 ± 26.6 and 15.1 ± 3.8 min, respectively. The mean time spent in the angiography suite was 50 min. The systolic blood pressure, pulse rate, base excess/deficit, serum-lactate levels, and D-dimer values were significantly improved after IVR. Although two patients needed additional treatment for morbidities following IVR intervention, all achieved complete recovery. The mortality rate was 25.0%, and no preventable deaths were noted. Eight patients showed unexpected survival.ConclusionsIn some cases, IVR may be the best first measure for resuscitative hemostasis in potentially lethal multiple injuries, given efficient diagnoses/actions and the ability to deal with complications.Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

32 keywords...

hide…