An evidence-based approach to patient selection for emergency department thoracotomy: A practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Within the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework, we performed a systematic review and developed evidence-based recommendations to answer the following PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes) question: should patients who present pulseless after critical injuries (with and without signs of life after penetrating thoracic, extrathoracic, or blunt injuries) undergo emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) (vs. resuscitation without EDT) to improve survival and neurologically intact survival? METHODS: All patients who underwent EDT were included while those involving either prehospital resuscitative thoracotomy or operating room thoracotomy were excluded. Quantitative synthesis via meta-analysis was not possible because no comparison or control group (i.e., survival or neurologically intact survival data for similar patients who did not undergo EDT) was available for the PICO questions of interest. RESULTS: The 72 included studies provided 10,238 patients who underwent EDT. Patients presenting pulseless after penetrating thoracic injury had the most favorable EDT outcomes both with (survival, 182 [21.3%] of 853; neurologically intact survival, 53 [11.7%] of 454) and without (survival, 76 [8.3%] of 920; neurologically intact survival, 25 [3.9%] of 641) signs of life. In patients presenting pulseless after penetrating extrathoracic injury, EDT outcomes were more favorable with signs of life (survival, 25 [15.6%] of 160; neurologically intact survival, 14 [16.5%] of 85) than without (survival, 4 [2.9%] of 139; neurologically intact survival, 3 [5.0%] of 60). Outcomes after EDT in pulseless blunt injury patients were limited with signs of life (survival, 21 [4.6%] of 454; neurologically intact survival, 7 [2.4%] of 298) and dismal without signs of life (survival, 7 [0.7%] of 995; neurologically intact survival, 1 [0.1%] of 825). CONCLUSION: We strongly recommend that patients who present pulseless with signs of life after penetrating thoracic injury undergo EDT. We conditionally recommend EDT for patients who present pulseless and have absent signs of life after penetrating thoracic injury, present or absent signs of life after penetrating extrathoracic injury, or present signs of life after blunt injury. Lastly, we conditionally recommend against EDT for pulseless patients without signs of life after blunt injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review/guideline, level III.

Blunt splenic injuries in the adolescent trauma population: the role of angiography and embolization.

BACKGROUND: Splenic artery embolization (SAE) improves non-operative splenic salvage rates in adults, but its utility and safety in the pediatric population is less well defined. OBJECTIVE: Because adolescent trauma patients are often triaged to adult trauma centers, we were interested in evaluating SAE in this particular population. We hypothesize that angiography and embolization is a safe and effective adjunct to non-operative management in the adolescent population. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients aged 13-17 years admitted to our Level I Trauma Center with blunt splenic injury from 1997-2005 was performed. We reviewed patient demographics, operative reports, admission, and follow-up abdominal computed tomography (ACT) results, angiographic reports, and patient outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients were reviewed. Eighteen patients underwent immediate surgery, and 79 of the remaining patients had planned non-operative management. Of those participating in non-operative management, 35/79 (44%) were initially observed and 44/79 (56%) underwent initial angiography, 23/44 having embolization. Patients in the embolization group had an overall high grade of injury (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma mean grade 3.3, SD 0.6). The overall splenic salvage rate was 96% (76/79) in the non-operative management group; 100% splenic salvage was seen in the observational group; 100% salvage was also seen in patients with negative angiography, and 87% salvage (20/23) in the splenic artery embolization group. CONCLUSION: Splenic artery embolization may be a valuable adjunct in adolescent blunt splenic injury, especially in higher grade injuries or with evidence of splenic vascular injury on ACT.

Current practice, demographics, and trends of critical care trained emergency physicians in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Critical care medicine (CCM) is of growing interest among emergency physicians (EPs), but the number of CCM-trained EPs and their postfellowship practice is unknown. This study's purpose was to conduct a descriptive census survey of EPs who have completed or are currently in a CCM fellowship. METHODS: The authors created a Web-based survey, and requests to participate were sent to EPs who have completed or are currently in a CCM fellowship. Responses were collected over a 12-month period. Physicians were located via multiple whom electronic mailing lists, including the Emergency Medicine Section of the Society of Critical Care Medicine, Critical Care Section of the American College of Emergency Physicians, and the Emergency Medicine Residents' Association. The authors also contacted CCM fellowship coordinators and used informal networking. Data were collected on emergency medicine (EM) and other residency training; discipline, duration, and year of CCM fellowship; current practice setting; and board certification status, including the European Diploma in Intensive Care (EDIC). RESULTS: A total of 104 physicians completed the survey (97% response rate), of whom 73 had completed fellowship at the time of participation, and 31 of whom were in fellowship training. Of those who completed fellowship, 36/73 (49%) practice both EM and CCM, and 45/73 (62%) practice in academic institutions. Multiple disciplines of fellowship were represented: multidisciplinary (39), surgical (28), internal medicine (16), anesthesia (14), and other (4). Together, the CCM fellowships at the University of Maryland R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center and the University of Pittsburgh have trained 42% of all EM-CCM physicians, with 38 other institutions training from one to four fellows each. The number of EPs completing CCM fellowships has risen: from 1974 to 1989, 12 EPs; from 1990 to 1999, 15 EPs; and from 2000 to 2007, 43 EPs. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency physicians are entering CCM fellowships in increasing numbers. Almost half of these EPs practice both EM and CCM.

Practice management guidelines for identification of cervical spine injuries following trauma: update from the eastern association for the surgery of trauma practice management guidelines committee.

BACKGROUND: Injury to the cervical spine (CS) is common after major trauma. The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma first published its Practice Management Guidelines for the evaluation of CS injury in 1998. A subsequent revision was published in 2000. Since that time a large volume of literature has been published. As a result, the Practice Management Guidelines Committee set out to develop updated guidelines for the identification of CS injury. METHODS: A search of the National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health MEDLINE database was performed using PubMed (www.pubmed.gov). The search retrieved English language articles regarding the identification of CS injury from 1998 to 2007. The questions posed were: who needs CS imaging; what imaging should be obtained; when should computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or flexion/extension radiographs be used; and how is significant ligamentous injury excluded in the comatose patient? RESULTS: Seventy-eight articles were identified. From this group, 52 articles were selected to construct the guidelines. CONCLUSION: There have been significant changes in practice since the previous CS injury guidelines. Most significantly, computed tomography has supplanted plain radiography as the primary screening modality in those who require imaging. Clinical clearance remains the standard in awake, alert patients with trauma without neurologic deficit or distracting injury who have no neck pain or tenderness with full range of motion. Cervical collars should be removed as soon as feasible. Controversy persists regarding CS clearance in the obtunded patient without gross neurologic deficit.