Association of helicopter transportation and improved mortality for patients with major trauma in the northern French Alps trauma system: an observational study based on the TRENAU registry.

BACKGROUND: Prompt prehospital triage and transportation are essential in an organised trauma system. The benefits of helicopter transportation on mortality in a physician-staffed pre-hospital trauma system remains unknown. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of helicopter transportation on mortality and prehospital triage. METHODS: Data collection was based on trauma registry for all consecutive major trauma patients transported by helicopter or ground ambulance in the Northern French Alps Trauma system between 2009 and 2017. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death. We performed multivariate logistic regression to compare death between helicopter and ground ambulance. RESULTS: Overall, 9458 major trauma patients were included. 37% (n = 3524) were transported by helicopter, and 56% (n = 5253) by ground ambulance. Prehospital time from the first call to the arrival at hospital was longer in the helicopter group compared to the ground ambulance group, respectively median time 95 [72-124] minutes and 85 [63-113] minutes (P < 0.001). Median transport time was similar between groups, 20 min [13-30] for helicopter and 21 min [14-32] for ground ambulance. Using multivariate logistic regression, helicopter was associated with reduced mortality compared to ground ambulance (adjusted OR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.53-0.92; P = 0.01) and with reduced undertriage (OR 0.69 95% CI, 0.60-0.80; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Helicopter was associated with reduced in-hospital death and undertriage by one third. It did not decrease prehospital and transport times in a system with the same crew using both helicopter or ground ambulance. The mortality and undertriage benefits observed suggest that the helicopter is the proper mode for long-distant transport to a regional trauma centre.

Intranasal sufentanil versus intravenous morphine for acute severe trauma pain: A double-blind randomized non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous morphine (IVM) is the most common strong analgesic used in trauma, but is associated with a clear time limitation related to the need to obtain an access route. The intranasal (IN) route provides easy administration with a fast peak action time due to high vascularization and the absence of first-pass metabolism. We aimed to determine whether IN sufentanil (INS) for patients presenting to an emergency department with acute severe traumatic pain results in a reduction in pain intensity non-inferior to IVM. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In a prospective, randomized, multicenter non-inferiority trial conducted in the emergency departments of 6 hospitals across France, patients were randomized 1:1 to INS titration (0.3 µg/kg and additional doses of 0.15 µg/kg at 10 minutes and 20 minutes if numerical pain rating scale [NRS] > 3) and intravenous placebo, or to IVM (0.1 mg/kg and additional doses of 0.05 mg/kg at 10 minutes and 20 minutes if NRS > 3) and IN placebo. Patients, clinical staff, and research staff were blinded to the treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the total decrease on NRS at 30 minutes after first administration. The prespecified non-inferiority margin was -1.3 on the NRS. The primary outcome was analyzed per protocol. Adverse events were prospectively recorded during 4 hours. Among the 194 patients enrolled in the emergency department cohort between November 4, 2013, and April 10, 2016, 157 were randomized, and the protocol was correctly administered in 136 (69 IVM group, 67 INS group, per protocol population, 76% men, median age 40 [IQR 29 to 54] years). The mean difference between NRS at first administration and NRS at 30 minutes was -4.1 (97.5% CI -4.6 to -3.6) in the IVM group and -5.2 (97.5% CI -5.7 to -4.6) in the INS group. Non-inferiority was demonstrated (p < 0.001 with 1-sided mean-equivalence t test), as the lower 97.5% confidence interval of 0.29 (97.5% CI 0.29 to 1.93) was above the prespecified margin of -1.3. INS was superior to IVM (intention to treat analysis: p = 0.034), but without a clinically significant difference in mean NRS between groups. Six severe adverse events were observed in the INS group and 2 in the IVM group (number needed to harm: 17), including an apparent imbalance for hypoxemia (3 in the INS group versus 1 in the IVM group) and for bradypnea (2 in the INS group versus 0 in the IVM group). The main limitation of the study was that the choice of concomitant analgesics, when they were used, was left to the discretion of the physician in charge, and co-analgesia was more often used in the IVM group. Moreover, the size of the study did not allow us to conclude with certainty about the safety of INS in emergency settings. CONCLUSIONS: We confirm the non-inferiority of INS compared to IVM for pain reduction at 30 minutes after administration in patients with severe traumatic pain presenting to an emergency department. The IN route, with no need to obtain a venous route, may allow early and effective analgesia in emergency settings and in difficult situations. Confirmation of the safety profile of INS will require further larger studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02095366. EudraCT 2013-001665-16.

Management of Multi-Casualty Incidents in Mountain Rescue: Evidence-Based Guidelines of the International Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MEDCOM).

Blancher, Marc, François Albasini, Fidel Elsensohn, Ken Zafren, Natalie Hölzl, Kyle McLaughlin, Albert R. Wheeler III, Steven Roy, Hermann Brugger, Mike Greene, and Peter Paal. Management of multi-casualty incidents in mountain rescue: Evidence-based guidelines of the International Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MEDCOM). High Alt Med Biol. 19:131-140, 2018. INTRODUCTION: Multi-Casualty Incidents (MCI) occur in mountain areas. Little is known about the incidence and character of such events, and the kind of rescue response. Therefore, the International Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MEDCOM) set out to provide recommendations for the management of MCI in mountain areas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Details of MCI occurring in mountain areas related to mountaineering activities and involving organized mountain rescue were collected. A literature search using (1) PubMed, (2) national mountain rescue registries, and (3) lay press articles on the internet was performed. The results were analyzed with respect to specific aspects of mountain rescue. RESULTS: We identified 198 MCIs that have occurred in mountain areas since 1956: 137 avalanches, 38 ski lift accidents, and 23 other events, including lightning injuries, landslides, volcanic eruptions, lost groups of people, and water-related accidents. DISCUSSION: General knowledge on MCI management is required. Due to specific aspects of triage and management, the approach to MCIs may differ between those in mountain areas and those in urban settings. CONCLUSIONS: Mountain rescue teams should be prepared to manage MCIs. Knowledge should be reviewed and training performed regularly. Cooperation between terrestrial rescue services, avalanche safety authorities, and helicopter crews is critical to successful management of MCIs in mountain areas.

Transcranial Doppler to Predict Neurologic Outcome after Mild to Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: To assess the performance of transcranial Doppler (TCD) in predicting neurologic worsening after mild to moderate traumatic brain injury. METHODS: The authors conducted a prospective observational study across 17 sites. TCD was performed upon admission in 356 patients (Glasgow Coma Score [GCS], 9 to 15) with mild lesions on cerebral computed tomography scan. Normal TCD was defined as a pulsatility index of less than 1.25 and diastolic blood flow velocity higher than 25 cm/s in the two middle cerebral arteries. The primary endpoint was secondary neurologic deterioration on day 7. RESULTS: Twenty patients (6%) developed secondary neurologic deterioration within the first posttraumatic week. TCD thresholds had 80% sensitivity (95% CI, 56 to 94%) and 79% specificity (95% CI, 74 to 83%) to predict neurologic worsening. The negative predictive values and positive predictive values of TCD were 98% (95% CI, 96 to 100%) and 18% (95% CI, 11to 28%), respectively. In patients with minor traumatic brain injury (GCS, 14 to 15), the sensitivity and specificity of TCD were 91% (95% CI, 59 to 100%) and 80% (95% CI, 75 to 85%), respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of a multivariate predictive model including age and GCS was significantly improved with the adjunction of TCD. Patients with abnormal TCD on admission (n = 86 patients) showed a more altered score for the disability rating scale on day 28 compared to those with normal TCD (n = 257 patients). CONCLUSIONS: TCD measurements upon admission may provide additional information about neurologic outcome after mild to moderate traumatic brain injury. This technique could be useful for in-hospital triage in this context. (Anesthesiology 2016; 125:346-54).