CT scans for pediatric injury in a middle-income country trauma center: Are we repeating past mistakes?

PurposeSustained efforts in high-income countries have decreased the rate of unnecessary computed tomography (CT) among children, aiming to minimize radiation exposure. There are little data regarding CT use for pediatric trauma in low- and middle-income countries. We aimed to assess the pattern and utility of CT performed during evaluation of trauma patients presenting to a middle-income country (MIC) trauma center.MethodsWe reviewed pediatric (age<18) trauma admissions at a single tertiary referral center in South Africa. Patient demographics, injury details, surgical intervention(s), and mortality were abstracted from the medical record. CT indications, results, and necessity were determined by review.ResultsOf 1,630 children admitted to the trauma center, 826 (51%) had CT imaging. Children undergoing imaging were younger (median age 11 [IQR: 6, 16] vs 13 [IQR: 7, 17]) and had higher median ISS [9 [IQR: 4, 13] vs 4 [2, 9]) compared to those without imaging (both p<0.001). Overall, 1,224 scans were performed with normal findings in 609 (50%). A median of 1 scan was performed per patient (range: 1–5). The most common location was CT head (n = 695, 57%). Among patients with positive findings on CT head (n = 443), 31 (7%) underwent either intracranial pressure monitoring or surgery. CT of the cervical spine had positive findings in 12 (7%) with no patients undergoing spine surgery. Of 173 patients with abdominal CT imaging, 83 (48%) had abnormal findings and 18 (10%) required operative exploration. Thirteen (16%) patients with abnormal findings on abdominal CT had exploratory laparotomy. Of 111 children undergoing whole body CT, 8 (7%) underwent thoracic and/or abdominal operations.ConclusionUse of CT during evaluation of pediatric trauma is common in an MIC center. A high rate of normal findings and low rates of intervention following head, cervical spine, and abdominal CT suggest potential overuse of this resource.Level of EvidenceLevel III     

Traumatic limb amputations at a level I trauma center

Introduction  

The purpose of this study was to analyze the epidemiology and outcomes after traumatic amputation of the upper (UEA) and lower (LEA) extremities.     

Close to zero preventable in-hospital deaths in pediatric trauma patients – An observational study from a major Scandinavian trauma center

BackgroundIn line with international trends, initial treatment of trauma patients has changed substantially over the last two decades. Although trauma is the leading cause of death and disability in children globally, in-hospital pediatric trauma related mortality is expected to be low in a mature trauma system. To evaluate the performance of a major Scandinavian trauma center we assessed treatment strategies and outcomes in all pediatric trauma patients over a 16-year period.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of all trauma patients under the age of 18 years admitted to a single institution from 1st of January 2003 to 31st of December 2018. Outcomes for two time periods were compared, 2003–2009 (Period 1; P1) and 2010–2018 (Period 2; P2). Deaths were further analyzed for preventability by the institutional trauma Mortality and Morbidity panel.ResultsThe study cohort consisted of 3939 patients. A total of 57 patients died resulting in a crude mortality of 1.4%, nearly one quarter of the study cohort (22.6%) was severely injured (Injury Severity Score > 15) and mortality in this group decreased from 9.7% in P1 to 4.1% in P2 (p<0.001). The main cause of death was brain injury in both periods, and 55 of 57 deaths were deemed non-preventable. The rate of emergency surgical procedures performed in the emergency department (ED) decreased during the study period. None of the 11 ED thoracotomies in non-survivors were performed after 2013.ConclusionA dedicated multidisciplinary trauma service with ongoing quality improvement efforts secured a low in-hospital mortality among severely injured children and a decrease in futile care. Deaths were shown to be almost exclusively non-preventable, pointing to the necessity of prioritizing prevention strategies to further decrease pediatric trauma related mortality.     

Trauma activation: are we making the right call? A 3-year experience at a Level I pediatric trauma center

Background

Trauma is the leading cause of death in children, accounting for half of all deaths in patients between birth and 18 years of age, and is the cause of a significant number of hospital admissions. We reviewed our experience at a Level I pediatric trauma center with a 2-level trauma activation (TA) system for mobilization of personnel over a 3-year period. The aim was to assess severity of injury of the trauma patients, resource use, and outcome.

Methods

After obtaining institutional review board approval, a retrospective analysis of all trauma patients between January 2006 and December 2008 was performed. Data analyzed included number of admissions, level of TA (STAT vs ALERT), mechanism of injury, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, injury severity score (ISS), need for operative intervention, and survival.

Results

In 3 years, there were 4502 patients entered. Trauma activation was initiated in 1315 patients (29.2%), divided between 211 STATs (4.7%) and 1104 ALERTs (24.5%). Mean patient age was 5.9 ± 4.1 years, 65% of the patients were boys, and blunt trauma accounted for 92% of the admissions. An ICU admission was required in 736 (16.3%) of the entire group, whereas 502 (38.2%) patients in the TA group were admitted to the ICU¹. The 154 STAT (21%) and 348 ALERT (47%) patients accounted for 68% of all ICU admissions¹. An ISS listed as severe (16-24) or very severe (>24) was found in 468 (10.4%) and 232 (5.2%) patients, respectively. An ISS listed as 16 or higher was found in 144 (68.2%) of the STATs and 264 (23.9%) of the ALERTs¹. Operative intervention was required in 2118 patients (47%). The overall mortality rate was 1.9%, and this increased to 5.8% in the TA group¹. There were 48 deaths (22.7%) in the STAT group, 29 deaths (2.6%) in the ALERT group, and 9 deaths (0.28%) in patients with no TA¹. When emergency department deaths were excluded, the remaining 60 deaths resulted in a mortality rate of 1.3%.

Conclusions

Our Level I pediatric trauma center manages a large volume of patients with significant acuity and, evidenced by a TA in 29% of the patients, a severe or very severe ISS in 16% of the patients, 16% of the patients requiring ICU admission, and 47% requiring operative intervention. The TA patients had markedly higher rates of ICU admission, ISS, and mortality. Deaths in the study were lower by almost an order of magnitude comparing TA STATs with TA ALERTs and TA ALERT patients with patients without TA.The TA criteria are in many ways very helpful and is integral to a Level I trauma center. However, opportunities were identified for improvement because of areas of “overutilization” and discordance between TA and ISS.     

The “non-preventable” preventable transfer? An analysis of the care from support services that injured children transferred to a level 1 pediatric trauma center receive

PurposeAlmost 30% of pediatric trauma transfers to our facility have previously been shown to be potentially preventable transfers (PT). However, we sought to evaluate what care from support services these PT received during admission.MethodsTraumatically injured children transferred between January 2014 and June 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. A PT was defined as a child who was discharged within 36 h of arrival without surgical intervention or advanced imaging studies. PT that received support services were compared to those that did not to determine which patients may benefit from these services were their transfers prevented.ResultsThere were 3212 transfers, and 927 (29%) were PT. When compared to non-PT, PT were younger, closer to our hospital, and had a lower ISS, extremity or C-spine injury, or assault/non-accidental trauma mechanism. PT were less likely to have a chest injury or a CT at the referring hospital. Of the PT, 30% had a support service consulted. PT with higher ISS or a head injury was more likely to receive a consultation with a support service.ConclusionsA significant proportion of these “preventable” transfers still receive important care from support services during their admission.Type of studyRetrospective study.Level of evidenceIII     

Pulmonary embolism: which pediatric trauma patients are at risk?

Background/Purpose

Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (DVT/PE) are rare in pediatric trauma patients, and guidelines for prophylaxis are scarce. The authors sought to identify subgroups of patients who may be at higher risk of developing DVT/PE.

Methods

Case-control study of pediatric trauma patients with DVT/PE. Odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for known risk factors of PE using matched trauma controls (χ² analysis).

Results

A total of 3637 pediatric trauma patients was admitted over the last 7 years. Three patients developed DVT/PE (overall incidence, 0.08%). There were 2 girls and 1 boy, aged 15, 15, and 9 years, respectively. All 3 had an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥25 and an initial Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) ≤8. None of the known and potential risk factors significantly increased the OR for developing DVT/PE: age 9 years or older (OR, 3.6; CI, 0.4-26), presence of head injury (OR, 2.9; CI, 0.3-22), female sex (OR, 1.2; CI, 0.15-9.1), GCS ≤8 (OR, 9.2; CI, 0.9-230), except ISS ≥25 (OR, 82; CI, 7.6-2058). The OR for a combination of age and GCS was 106, and the OR for the 3 risk factors (age, ISS, GCS) common to all 3 patients was 114 (CI, 10-5000; P < .001).

Conclusions

The overall incidence of DVT/PE in pediatric trauma patients is <0.1% and routine prophylaxis is not recommended. Children aged 9 years or older with an initial GCS ≤8 and patients with an estimated ISS ≥25 may constitute a high-risk group in which prophylaxis could be considered.     

Recurrent incisional hernia repairs at a tertiary hernia center: Are outcomes really inferior to initial repairs?

BackgroundRecurrent ventral hernia repairs are reported to have higher recurrence and complication rates than initial ventral hernia repairs. This is the largest analysis of outcomes for initial versus recurrent open ventral hernia repairs reported in the literature.MethodsA prospective, institutional database at a tertiary hernia center was queried for patients undergoing open ventral hernia repairs with complete fascial closure and synthetic mesh placement.ResultsA total of 1,694 open ventral hernia repairs patients were identified, including 896 (52.9%) initial ventral hernia repairs and 798 (47.1%)recurrent ventral hernia repairs. Recurrent ventral hernia repair patients were more complex: older (P = .003), higher body mass index (P < .001), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class (P < .001), incidence of diabetics (P = .003), comorbidities (P < .001), and larger hernia defects (133.3 ± 171.9 vs 220.2 ± 210.0; P < .001). Recurrent ventral hernia repairs also had longer operative times (161.6 ± 82.4 vs 188.2 ± 68.9 minutes; P < .001), increased use of preoperative botulinum toxin A injection (4.3% vs 10.1%; P = .01), components separation (19.2% vs 39.5%; P < .001), and panniculectomy (20.3% vs 35.8%; P < .001). The overall hernia recurrence rate was 4.4% at a mean follow-up of 36.6 ± 45.5 months. Between the initial ventral hernia repairs and recurrent ventral hernia repairs, the hernia recurrence rates were equivalent (4.2% vs 4.7%, P = .63). Rates of wound infection, seromas, hematomas, mesh infections, and wound related reoperations (P > .05) were nonsignificant.ConclusionAt a tertiary hernia center, despite higher-risk patients, larger hernia defects, and increased components separation in recurrent ventral hernia repairs, early recurrence rates, wound complications, and reoperations are similar to initial ventral hernia repairs.     

Resuscitative emergency thoracotomy in a Scandinavian trauma hospital--is it justified?

OBJECTIVE: Resuscitative emergency thoracotomy (ET) is of value in selected (penetrating) trauma patients. Current survival-estimates and recommended guidelines are based on data from the United States. However, reports from European trauma centres are lacking. We report the current experience from a Scandinavian trauma hospital. METHODS: Identification of all consecutive ETs performed during a 5-year period. Data on demographics, and injury severity score (ISS), mechanism and location were recorded. Physiological status on admission (revised trauma score, RTS) and probability of survival (Ps) were calculated. Signs of life (SOL) and need for closed-chest cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CC-CPR) were recorded through the post-injury phase. RESULTS: Ten patients underwent ET with no survivors. The annual incidence of ET was 0.7 per 100,000 inhabitants during the study period, with an increasing trend during the last years (r=0.74, p=0.014). ETs were performed in 0.7% of all trauma admissions, and in 2.5% of all severely injured patients (ISS>or=16). Blunt mechanism dominated; only three had penetrating injuries. Most frequent location of major injury was "multiple" (n=4) and "thoracic" (n=4). The male to female ratio was 7:3. Median age was 51 years (range 21-77). Median ISS was 34.5 (range 26-75), indicating severely injured patients, with seriously deranged physiology (median RTS of 0.0, range 0-6.1) with poor chance of survival (median Ps of 4.4%, range 0-89.5%). Males had significantly lower RTS and Ps (p=0.007 and 0.03, respectively) than females. Eight patients had signs of life at some time post-injury, but only four in the emergency room. Six patients had both pre- and in-hospital CC-CPR. Four patients had additional surgery to ET. Two possible preventable deaths were identified (Ps) of 51 and 89%), one in a third trimester pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Emergency thoracotomy is a rarely performed procedure in a rather busy Scandinavian trauma hospital, and outcome is dismal. Reevaluation of our decision-making process concerning the use of emergency thoracotomy is needed. How survival data and clinical experience in Europe compare to current figures from North America deserves further attention.     

Is routine MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) justified prior to cholecystectomy?

Purpose  

We investigated routinely the bile ducts by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography (MRCP) prior to cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to analyze the rate of clinically inapparent common bile duct (CBD) stones, the predictive value of elevated liver enzymes for CBD stones, and the influence of the radiological results on the perioperative management.     

CT scan and the pediatric trauma patient--are we overdoing it?

Background

Recent literature expresses concern for an increased risk of cancer in children exposed to low-dose radiation during computed tomography (CT). In response, children’s hospitals have implemented the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) concept, but this is not true at most adult referring institutions. The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic necessity of CT in the evaluation of pediatric trauma patients.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted of the trauma database at a large, level I, freestanding children’s hospital with specific attention to the pattern of CT evaluations.

Results

From January 1999 to October 2003, 1,653 children with traumatic injuries were evaluated by the trauma team, with 1,422 patients undergoing 2,361 CT scans. Overall, 54% of obtained scans were interpreted as normal. Fifty percent of treated patients were transferred from referring hospitals. Approximately half arrived with previous CT scans with 9% of these requiring further imaging. Of the 897 patients that underwent abdominal CT imaging, only 2% were taken to the operating room for an exploratory laparotomy. In addition, of those patients who had abnormal findings on an abdominal CT scan, only 5% underwent surgical exploration.

Conclusions

CT scans are used with regularity in the initial evaluation of the pediatric trauma patient, and perhaps abdominal CT imaging is being used too frequently. A substantial number of these scans come from referral institutions that may not comply with ALARA. The purported risk of CT radiation questions whether a more selective approach to CT evaluation of the trauma patient should be considered.     

Do patients know their post-operative plan? A prospective cohort study of orthopaedic trauma patients at a level I trauma center

ObjectivePatient compliance with weight bearing and physical therapy recommendations is critical following an orthopedic injury. Proper compliance requires knowledge of the postinjury plan, but there is little published data regarding comprehension of postinjury recommendations among orthopedic trauma patients. We hypothesized that patient knowledge of weight bearing and physical therapy instructions following an orthopaedic injury would be poor.DesignProspective Observational CohortSettingLevel I Trauma CenterPatients194 prospectively enrolled patients completed a questionnaire testing their knowledge of their weight bearing status and physical therapy plan at their first clinic visit following an inpatient admission with an orthopedic injuryResultsDespite the fact that 73% of patients were participating in physical therapy following hospital discharge, only 66% (95% CI 60–73%) of patients correctly identified their postinjury weight bearing status. A multivariate analysis found no significant correlation between chance of knowing postoperative weightbearing status or physical therapy plan and any of the socioeconomic patient factors we collected.ConclusionsOrthopedic trauma patients had a relatively poor understanding of even basic postinjury physical therapy instructions. This did not appear to be affected by age, gender, or socioeconomic factors. Orthopedic trauma surgeons should be aware of the significant potential for knowledge deficits among their patients and should make specific efforts to identify and correct those deficits.     

Is there a relationship between trauma center volume and mortality?

BACKGROUND: The guidelines for Level I trauma center verification require 1,200 admissions per year. Several studies looking at the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes after injury have reached conflicting conclusions. The goal of our study was to examine the relationship between patient volume and outcomes (mortality and length of hospital stay) in California's trauma centers. METHODS: Data for patients >or= 18 years old admitted after injury (n = 98,245) to a Level I or II trauma center (n = 38) in 1998 and 1999 were obtained from the Patient Discharge Data of the State of California. Hospital volume was derived from the annual number of admissions per center, and covariates including age, sex, mechanism of injury, Injury Severity Score, and trauma center designation were analyzed. RESULTS: Hospital volume was not a significant predictor of death or length of hospital stay. More severely injured patients appeared to have worse outcomes at the highest volume centers. CONCLUSION: In our study, hospital volume was not a good proxy for outcome. Low-volume centers appeared to have outcomes that were comparable to centers with higher volumes. Perhaps institutional outcomes rather than volumes should be used as a criterion for trauma center verification.     

Are wedge biopsies of cadaveric kidneys obtained at procurement reliable?

BACKGROUND: Single wedge biopsy of cadaveric kidneys from donors older than 55 is currently the standard method of evaluating their viability for transplantation. The degree of glomerulosclerosis presently determines whether a kidney can be transplanted, but most biopsies sample only the subcapsular region and may not accurately represent the true renal architecture. Our study evaluated the accuracy of transplant suitability determinations based upon the single wedge biopsy of cadaveric kidneys. METHODS: We took kidneys that were refused by UNOS centers on the basis of biopsy results, examined their histology in detail, and reviewed donor medical histories. Sections were taken from the upper, lower, and mid-portion of each kidney and stained with the periodic acid Schiff stain. Percentage and location of glomerulosclerosis and other relevant pathology were then determined in each section. We compared our findings with the results of the original wedge biopsies obtained at the time of procurement. RESULTS: Nine kidneys were obtained and examined. The wedge biopsies at the time of procurement showed glomerulosclerosis ranging from 8 to 36% (median 17%). The multiple kidney sections we analyzed showed fewer sclerosed glomeruli, ranging from 3 to 15% (median 7%, P<0.001), with most of the sclerosed glomeruli identified located in the immediate subcapsular region (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Wedge biopsies of donor kidneys can overestimate the total amount of glomerulosclerosis, apparently because of a predominance of sclerosis in the kidney's subcapsular region, the area predominantly sampled by the usual wedge biopsy. These inappropriately high estimates of glomerulosclerosis can result in refusal of kidneys that might be suitable for transplantation.     

Are there variations in timing to tracheostomy in a tertiary academic medical center?

BackgroundIt is unclear what drives variation in timing to tracheostomy among different patients.MethodsAge, ethnicity, admission service, and income were retrospectively collected for patients undergoing tracheostomy in a Level 1 trauma center from 2007 to 2017. The primary outcome was time to tracheostomy with early tracheostomy (ET) or late tracheotomy (LT) defined as 3–7 or ≥ 10 days post-intubation, respectively. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), ventilator associated pneumonia, and mortality.ResultsAmong 1,640 patients, more men had ET compared to women (30% vs 28%; p = 0.05). The mean time to tracheostomy was 11.2 ± 7.7 days. Neurology and trauma patients had significantly shorter time to tracheostomy compared to other services. Age, ethnicity, and income showed no differences in timing to tracheostomy. Patients who underwent LT had a longer LOS (46 vs 32 days, p < 0.01) and higher mortality (19% vs 13% p < 0.01). Conclusions: There were no disparities in timing to tracheostomy based on age, ethnicity, or income. We detected a hesitation in performing tracheostomies by certain providers with shorter LOS and improved mortality in ET.     

Trauma laparotomy in a rural setting before transfer to a regional center: does it save lives?

BACKGROUND: In the rural setting, long distances may necessitate that a patient undergo emergency laparotomy before transfer to a regional trauma center for definitive management. The purpose of this study was to review the experience of three regional trauma centers with such treated patients. METHODS: This study was a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent emergency laparotomy for trauma before transfer, identified from the respective databases of participating centers over a 6-year period. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients met the study criteria. Twenty-six (46%) were transferred primarily for management of the abdominal injury, and 14 of these patients (25% overall) underwent damage control procedures. Overall survival was 82%. Logistic regression demonstrated that transfer for treatment of the extra-abdominal injury was the only significant predictor of survival (odds ratio, 34.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.80-655.24). CONCLUSION: Although patients undergoing laparotomy who were subsequently transferred for management of abdominal injury have reasonable outcome, patients transferred primarily for management of extra-abdominal injury seem to have a survival advantage.