Controlling hemorrhage in exsanguinating pelvic fractures: Utility of extraperitoneal pelvic packing as a damage control procedure.

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان:	Controlling hemorrhage in exsanguinating pelvic fractures: Utility of extraperitoneal pelvic packing as a damage control procedure.
المؤلفون:	Hsu JM; Department of Trauma Service, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Department of Discipline of Surgery, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia., Yadev S; Department of Trauma Service, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia., Faraj S; Department of Trauma Service, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
المصدر:	International journal of critical illness and injury science [Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci] 2016 Jul-Sep; Vol. 6 (3), pp. 148-152.
نوع المنشور:	Journal Article
اللغة:	English
بيانات الدورية:	Publisher: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd Country of Publication: India NLM ID: 101571136 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 2229-5151 (Print) Linking ISSN: 22295151 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci Subsets: PubMed not MEDLINE
أسماء مطبوعة:	Original Publication: Mumbai : Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd., [2011]-
مستخلص:	Introduction: Exsanguinating pelvic fractures are still associated with a significant mortality rate of 28-60%. Extraperitoneal pelvic packing (EPP) has been proposed as an optimal method of early haemorrhage control. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of EPP compared with angioembolization as a primary intervention for patients with exsanguinating pelvic fracture. Method: A prospective observational trial was performed at Westmead Hospital between September 2011 and May 2014. Adult patients with exsanguinating pelvic fracture were allocated into one of two treatment groups determined by the primary/initial haemorrhage control technique: 1. EPP followed by angioembolization or 2. Angioembolization alone. The intervention was determined by the on-call surgeon's proficiency with EPP. Demographic, clinical and laboratory data were collected. Univariate analysis of the two groups was performed with Student's t -test, Mann-Whitney-U test and Fisher's exact test. Results: 24 exsanguinating pelvic fracture cases were included. 14 underwent EPP while 10 underwent angioembolization as the primary intervention. Although not statistically significant, the EPP group was more severely injured (Injury Severity Score 32 vs. 23), more acidotic (base deficit 7.9 vs. 6.2), and more hypotensive (Systolic Blood Pressure 74.2 vs. 84.3). Despite these differences, mortality was reduced (7.1% vs. 30%, not significant). Time to EPP compared with angioembolization was reduced (67.6 vs. 130.2 minutes, P = 0.017). Pre-angioembolization transfusion requirement was also reduced with EPP (0.032 vs. 0.052 units/min, P = 0.04). Arterial injury was found in 51% of the EPP group. There were no significant differences in complication rates between the groups. Conclusion: EPP appears to be a safe and efficient technique for primary haemorrhage control in exsanguinating pelvic fractures. Given the high rate of associated arterial injury, EPP should be considered as the first part of a "damage control" approach for exsanguinating pelvic fractures.
References:	Injury. 1996;27 Suppl 1:S-A46-50. (PMID: 8762343) J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1968 May;50(2):376-9. (PMID: 5651345) J Trauma. 2002 Sep;53(3):446-50; discussion 450-1. (PMID: 12352479) J Am Coll Surg. 2002 Jul;195(1):1-10. (PMID: 12113532) Surgery. 1973 Mar;73(3):454-62. (PMID: 4687804) Curr Opin Crit Care. 2003 Dec;9(6):515-23. (PMID: 14639072) J Trauma. 2011 Oct;71(4):E79-86. (PMID: 21610537) J Orthop Trauma. 2001 Sep-Oct;15(7):468-74. (PMID: 11602828) J Trauma. 2002 Aug;53(2):303-8; discussion 308. (PMID: 12169938) J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014 Jan;76(1):134-9. (PMID: 24368368) J Trauma. 2005 Apr;58(4):778-82. (PMID: 15824655) Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1965 Aug;121:313-5. (PMID: 14320379) J Trauma. 1997 Sep;43(3):395-9. (PMID: 9314298) J Orthop Trauma. 2002 Sep;16(8):553-61. (PMID: 12352563) Injury. 2009 Jan;40(1):54-60. (PMID: 19041967) Surgery. 1964 Sep;56:601-2. (PMID: 14217618) Am J Surg. 2006 Aug;192(2):211-23. (PMID: 16860634) J Trauma. 2010 Dec;69(6):1507-14. (PMID: 20495490) J Trauma. 2007 Apr;62(4):843-52. (PMID: 17426538) J Orthop Trauma. 2007 Jan;21(1):31-7. (PMID: 17211266) J Trauma. 1970 Aug;10(8):619-23. (PMID: 5311157) Injury. 2009 Apr;40(4):343-53. (PMID: 19278678) J Trauma. 1973 Oct;13(10 ):849-56. (PMID: 4743142) Aust N Z J Surg. 2000 May;70(5):338-43. (PMID: 10830595) Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Aug;(305):69-80. (PMID: 8050249) Injury. 2009 Oct;40(10):1023-30. (PMID: 19371871) J Trauma. 2007 Apr;62(4):834-9; discussion 839-42. (PMID: 17426537) J Trauma. 1985 Nov;25(11):1021-9. (PMID: 4057290) Injury. 2014 Apr;45(4):738-41. (PMID: 24314873)
فهرسة مساهمة:	Keywords: Damage control; pelvic fracture; shock
تواريخ الأحداث:	Date Created: 20161011 Latest Revision: 20200928
رمز التحديث:	20231215
مُعرف محوري في PubMed:	PMC5051058
DOI:	10.4103/2229-5151.190655
PMID:	27722117
قاعدة البيانات:	MEDLINE

الوصف
تدمد:	2229-5151
DOI:	10.4103/2229-5151.190655