Shock : molecular, cellular, and systemic pathobiological aspects and therapeutic approaches : the official journal the Shock Society, the European Shock Society, the Brazilian Shock Society, the International Federation of Shock Societies
-
The mortality for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains unacceptably high. Success in clinical trials has been limited, resulting in a lack of effective therapies to treat the syndrome. The projected increase in mechanically ventilated patients and global need for critical care services suggests that the clinical and research landscape in ARDS can no longer be confined to the intensive care unit. ⋯ Furthermore, the ED is an entry point for many of the highest-risk patients for ARDS development and progression. These facts, combined with prolonged lengths of stay in the ED, suggest that the ED could represent a window of opportunity for treatment and preventive strategies, as well as clinical trial enrollment. This review aims to discuss some of the potential strategies that may prevent or alter the trajectory of ARDS, with a focus on the potential role the ED could play in reducing the burden of this syndrome.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Plasma First in the Field for Postinjury Hemorrhagic Shock.
Hemorrhage is the most preventable cause of death in civilian and military trauma, and despite tremendous advances in patient transport in the field, survival within the first hour has changed little over the past 40 years. The pathogenesis of trauma-induced coagulopathy is multifactorial, but most authorities believe there is an early depletion of clotting factors. ⋯ The rationale includes the possibility that plasma-first resuscitation may be advantageous beyond direct effects on clotting capacity. The study design is based on a ground ambulance system that allows rapid prehospital thawing of frozen plasma.
-
The environmental and logistical constraints of the prehospital setting make it a challenging place for the treatment of trauma patients. This is perhaps more pronounced in the management of battlefield casualties before extraction to definitive care. In seeking solutions, interest has been renewed in implementing damage control resuscitation principles in the prehospital setting, a concept termed remote damage control resuscitation. ⋯ Management of trauma-related airway and respiratory compromise is evolving, with scope to improve on currently accepted practices. The purpose of this review is to highlight the challenges of treating patients in the prehospital setting and suggest potential solutions. In doing so, we hope to maintain the enthusiasm from people in the field and highlight areas for prehospital specific research and development, so that improved rates of casualty survival will continue.
-
Through necessity, military medicine has been the driver of medical innovation throughout history. The battlefield presents challenges, such as the requirement to provide care while under threat, resource limitation, and prolonged evacuation times, which must be overcome to improve casualty survival. Focus must also be placed on identifying the causes, and timing, of death within the battlefield. ⋯ We must also carry on working alongside our civilian colleagues so that the benefits of translational experience are not lost. This review describes several countries current military approaches to prehospital trauma care. These approaches, refined through a decade of experience, merit consideration for integration into civilian prehospital care practice.
-
In past and ongoing military conflicts, the use of whole blood (WB) as a resuscitative product to treat trauma-induced shock and coagulopathy has been widely accepted as an alternative when availability of a balanced component-based transfusion strategy is restricted or lacking. In previous military conflicts, ABO group O blood from donors with low titers of anti-A/B blood group antibodies was favored. Now, several policies demand the exclusive use of ABO group-specific WB. ⋯ Emergency settings are often chaotic and resource limited, factors well known to increase the potential for human errors. Using ABO group-specific WB in emergencies may delay treatment because of needed ABO typing, increase the risk of clinical HTRs, and increase the severity of these reactions as well as increase the danger of underresuscitation due to lack of some ABO groups. When the clinical decision has been made to transfuse WB in patients with life-threatening hemorrhagic shock, we recommend the use of group O WB from donors with low anti-A/B titers when logistical constraints preclude the rapid availability of ABO group-specific WB and reliable group matching between donor and recipient is not feasible.