Influencing factors for delayed diagnosed injuries in multiple trauma patients - introducing the 'Risk for Delayed Diagnoses Score' (RIDD-Score).

PURPOSE: Delayed diagnosed injuries (DDI) in severely injured patients are an essential problem faced by emergency staff. Aim of the current study was to analyse incidence and type of DDI in a large trauma cohort. Furthermore, factors predicting DDI were investigated to create a score to identify patients at risk for DDI. METHODS: Multiply injured patients admitted between 2011 and 2020 and documented in the TraumaRegister DGU® were analysed. Primary admitted patients with severe injuries and/or intensive care who survived at least 24 h were included. The prevalence, type and severity of DDI were described. Through multivariate logistic regression analysis, risk factors for DDI were identified. Results were used to create a 'Risk for Delayed Diagnoses' (RIDD) score. RESULTS: Of 99,754 multiply injured patients, 9,175 (9.2%) had 13,226 injuries first diagnosed on ICU. Most common DDI were head injuries (35.8%), extremity injuries (33.3%) and thoracic injuries (19.7%). Patients with DDI had a higher ISS, were more frequently unconscious, in shock, required more blood transfusions, and stayed longer on ICU and in hospital. Multivariate analysis identified seven factors indicating a higher risk for DDI (OR from 1.2 to 1.9). The sum of these factors gives the RIDD score, which expresses the individual risk for a DDI ranging from 3.6% (0 points) to 24.8% (6 + points). CONCLUSION: DDI are present in a sounding number of trauma patients. The reported results highlight the importance of a highly suspicious and thorough physical examination in the trauma room. The introduced RIDD score might help to identify patients at high risk for DDI. A tertiary survey should be implemented to minimise delayed diagnosed or even missed injuries.

[How to: correctly read scientific articles : Research design and methodology]. / How to: einen wissenschaftlichen Artikel richtig lesen : Forschungsdesign und Methodik.

Criteria for assessment of the significance of scientific articles are presented. The focus is on research design and methodology, illustrated by the classical study on prehospital volume treatment of severely injured individuals with penetrating torso injuries by Bickell et al. (1994). A well-thought out research design is crucial for the success of a scientific study and is documented in a study protocol beforehand. A hypothesis is a provisional explanation or prediction and must be testable, falsifiable, precise, and relevant. There are various types of randomization methods, with the randomized controlled trial being the gold standard for clinical interventional studies. When reading a scientific article it is important to verify whether the research design and setting align with the research question and whether potential sources of error have been considered and controlled. Critical scrutiny should also be applied to references, the funding and expertise of the researchers.

Implementation of health-related quality of life in the German TraumaRegister DGU® - first results of a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 30,000 people are affected by severe injuries in Germany each year. Continuous progress in prehospital and hospital care has significantly reduced the mortality of polytrauma patients. With increasing survival rates, the functional outcome, health-related quality (hrQoL) of life and ability to work are now gaining importance. Aim of the study is, the presentation of the response behavior of seriously injured patients on the one hand and the examination of the factors influencing the quality of life and ability to work 12 months after major trauma on the other hand. Building on these initial results, a standard outcome tool shall be integrated in the established TraumaRegister DGU® in the future. METHODS: In 2018, patients [Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16; age:18-75 years] underwent multicenter one-year posttraumatic follow-up in six study hospitals. In addition to assessing hrQoL by using the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), five additional questions (treatment satisfaction; ability to work; trauma-related medical treatment; relevant physical disability, hrQoL as compared with the prior to injury status) were applied. RESULTS: Of the 1,162 patients contacted, 594 responded and were included in the analysis. The post-injury hrQoL does not show statistically significant differences between the sexes. Regarding age, however, the younger the patient at injury, the better the SF-12 physical sum score. Furthermore, the physically perceived quality of life decreases statistically significantly in relation to the severity of the trauma as measured by the ISS, whereas the mentally perceived quality of life shows no differences in terms of injury severity. A large proportion of severely injured patients were very satisfied (42.2%) or satisfied (39.9%) with the treatment outcome. It should be emphasized that patients with a high injury severity (ISS > 50) were on average more often very satisfied with the treatment outcome (46.7%). A total of 429 patients provided information on their ability to work 12 months post-injury. Here, 194 (45.2%) patients had a full employment, and 58 (13.5%) patients were had a restricted employment. CONCLUSION: The present results show the importance of a structured assessment of the postinjury hrQoL and the ability to work after polytrauma. Further studies on the detection of influenceable risk factors on hrQoL and ability to work in the intersectoral course of treatment should follow to enable the best possible outcome of polytrauma survivors.

Prediction of prolonged length of stay on the intensive care unit in severely injured patients-a registry-based multivariable analysis.

Purpose: Mortality is the primary outcome measure in severely injured trauma victims. However, quality indicators for survivors are rare. We aimed to develop and validate an outcome measure based on length of stay on the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: The TraumaRegister DGU of the German Trauma Society (DGU) was used to identify 108,178 surviving patients with serious injuries who required treatment on ICU (2014-2018). In a first step, need for prolonged ICU stay, defined as 8 or more days, was predicted. In a second step, length of stay was estimated in patients with a prolonged stay. Data from the same trauma registry (2019-2022, n = 72,062) were used to validate the models derived with logistic and linear regression analysis. Results: The mean age was 50 years, 70% were males, and the average Injury Severity Score was 16.2 points. Average/median length of stay on ICU was 6.3/2 days, where 78% were discharged from ICU within the first 7 days. Prediction of need for a prolonged ICU stay revealed 15 predictors among which injury severity (worst Abbreviated Injury Scale severity level), need for intubation, and pre-trauma condition were the most important ones. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.903 (95% confidence interval 0.900-0.905). Length of stay prediction in those with a prolonged ICU stay identified the need for ventilation and the number of injuries as the most important factors. Pearson's correlation of observed and predicted length of stay was 0.613. Validation results were satisfactory for both estimates. Conclusion: Length of stay on ICU is a suitable outcome measure in surviving patients after severe trauma if adjusted for severity. The risk of needing prolonged ICU care could be calculated in all patients, and observed vs. predicted rates could be used in quality assessment similar to mortality prediction. Length of stay prediction in those who require a prolonged stay is feasible and allows for further benchmarking.

[Cause of Death after Severe Trauma: 30 Years Experience from TraumaRegister DGU]. / Woran stirbt der schwerverletzte Patient: eine Analyse aus 30 Jahren TraumaRegister DGU.

Every year, thousands of people in Germany succumb to severe injuries. But what causes the death of these patients? In addition to the trauma, pre-traumatic health status, age, and other influencing factors play a role in the outcome after trauma. This study aims to answer the question of what causes the death of a severely injured patient.For this publication, in addition to previously published results, we examined current data from patients in German hospitals from the years 2015-2022 (8 years) documented in the TraumaRegister DGU®. The feature "Presumed Cause of Death", introduced in 2015, was considered. Patients transferred out early (< 48 h) as well as patients with minor injuries were excluded from this analysis.The number of fatalities decreases over time and does not correspond to a traditionally postulated tri-modal mortality distribution. Instead, over time, the distribution of causes of death shows significant variation. In over half of the cases (54%), traumatic brain injury (TBI) was the presumed cause of death, followed by organ failure (24%) and haemorrhage (9%). TBI dominates, especially in the first week, haemorrhage in the first 24 h, and organ failure as a cause steadily increases over time.In summary, it can be observed that the risk of death due to trauma-related consequences is highest in the first minutes, hours, and days, decreasing steadily over time. Particularly, the extent of injuries, head injuries, and significant blood loss are early risk factors.

Evaluation of Prehospital Undertriage in Relation to Trauma Team Activation-Results from a Prospective Study in 12 Level one German Trauma Centers.

Background/Objective: This prospective, multicenter observational cohort study was carried out in 12 trauma centers in Germany and Switzerland. Its purpose was to evaluate the rate of undertriage, as well as potential consequences, and relate these with different Trauma Team Activation Protocols (TTA-Protocols), as this has not been done before in Germany. Methods: Each trauma center collected the data during a three-month period between December 2019 and February 2021. All 12 participating hospitals are certified as supra-regional trauma centers. Here, we report a subgroup analysis of undertriaged patients. Those included in the study were all consecutive adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with acute trauma admitted to the emergency department of one of the participating hospitals by the prehospital emergency medical service (EMS) within 6 h after trauma. The data contained information on age, sex, trauma mechanism, pre- and in-hospital physiology, emergency interventions, emergency surgical interventions, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and death within 48 h. Trauma team activation (TTA) was initiated by the emergency medical services. This should follow the national guidelines for severe trauma using established field triage criteria. We used various denominators, such as ISS, and criteria for the appropriateness of TTA to evaluate the undertriage in four groups. Results: This study included a total of 3754 patients. The average injury severity score was 5.1 points, and 7.0% of cases (n = 261) presented with an injury severity score (ISS) of 16+. TTA was initiated for a total of 974 (26%) patients. In group 1, we evaluated how successful the actual practice in the EMS was in identifying patients with ISS 16+. The undertriage rate was 15.3%, but mortality was lower in the undertriage cohort compared to those with a TTA (5% vs. 10%). In group 2, we evaluated the actual practice of EMS in terms of identifying patients meeting the appropriateness of TTA criteria; this showed a higher undertriage rate of 35.9%, but as seen in group 1, the mortality was lower (5.9% vs. 3.3%). In group 3, we showed that, if the EMS were to strictly follow guideline criteria, the rate of undertriage would be even higher (26.2%) regarding ISS 16+. Using the appropriateness of TTA criteria to define the gold standard for TTA (group 4), 764 cases (20.4%) fulfilled at least one condition for retrospective definition of TTA requirement. Conclusions: Regarding ISS 16+, the rate of undertriage in actual practice was 15.3%, but those patients did not have a higher mortality.

Factors affecting physicians' decision to start prehospital blood product transfusion in blunt trauma patients: A cohort study of Helsinki Trauma Registry.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital blood transfusions are increasing as a treatment for bleeding trauma patients at risk for exsanguination. Triggers for starting transfusion in the field are less studied. We analyzed the factors affecting the decision of physicians to start prehospital blood product transfusion (PHBT) in blunt adult trauma patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data of all adult blunt trauma patients from the Helsinki Trauma Registry between March 2016 and July 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate analysis for the identification of predictive factors and multivariate regression analysis for their importance as predictive factors for the initiation of PHBT were applied. RESULTS: There were 1652 patients registered in the database. A total of 556 of them were treated by a physician-level prehospital emergency care unit, of which by transfusion-capable unit in 394 patients. PHBT (red blood cells and/or plasma) was started in 19.8% of the patients. We identified three statistically highly important clinical triggers for starting PHBT: high crystalloid volume need, shock index ≥0.9, and need for prehospital pleural decompression. DISCUSSION: PHBT in blunt adult trauma patients is initiated in ~20% of the patients in Southern Finland. High crystalloid volume need, shock index ≥0.9 and prehospital pleural decompression are associated with the initiation of PHBT, probably reflecting patients at high risk for bleeding.

In-hospital mortality after prehospital endotracheal intubation versus alternative methods of airway management in trauma patients. A cohort study from the TraumaRegister DGU®.

PURPOSE: Prehospital airway management in trauma is a key component of care and is associated with particular risks. Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is the gold standard, while extraglottic airway devices (EGAs) are recommended alternatives. There is limited evidence comparing their effectiveness. In this retrospective analysis from the TraumaRegister DGU®, we compared ETI with EGA in prehospital airway management regarding in-hospital mortality in patients with trauma. METHODS: We included cases only from German hospitals with a minimum Abbreviated Injury Scale score ≥ 2 and age ≥ 16 years. All patients without prehospital airway protection were excluded. We performed a multivariate logistic regression to adjust with the outcome measure of hospital mortality. RESULTS: We included n = 10,408 cases of whom 92.5% received ETI and 7.5% EGA. The mean injury severity score was higher in the ETI group (28.8 ± 14.2) than in the EGA group (26.3 ± 14.2), and in-hospital mortality was comparable: ETI 33.0%; EGA 30.7% (27.5 to 33.9). After conducting logistic regression, the odds ratio for mortality in the ETI group was 1.091 (0.87 to 1.37). The standardized mortality ratio was 1.04 (1.01 to 1.07) in the ETI group and 1.1 (1.02 to 1.26) in the EGA group. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in mortality rates between the use of ETI or EGA, or the ratio of expected versus observed mortality when using ETI.

Reality of treatment for severely injured patients: are there age-specific differences?

BACKGROUND: Major trauma and its consequences are one of the leading causes of death worldwide across all age groups. Few studies have conducted comparative age-specific investigations. It is well known that children respond differently to major trauma than elderly patients due to physiological differences. The aim of this study was to analyze the actual reality of treatment and outcomes by using a matched triplet analysis of severely injured patients of different age groups. METHODS: Data from the TraumaRegister DGU® were analyzed. A total of 56,115 patients met the following inclusion criteria: individuals with Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale > 2 and < 6, primary admission, from German-speaking countries, and treated from 2011-2020. Furthermore, three age groups were defined (child: 3-15 years; adult: 20-50 years; and elderly: 70-90 years). The matched triplets were defined based on the following criteria: 1. exact injury severity of the body regions according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (head, thorax, abdomen, extremities [including pelvis], and spine) and 2. level of the receiving hospital. RESULTS: A total of 2,590 matched triplets could be defined. Traffic accidents were the main cause of severe injury in younger patients (child: 59.2%; adult: 57.9%). In contrast, low falls (from < 3 m) were the most frequent cause of accidents in the elderly group (47.2%). Elderly patients were least likely to be resuscitated at the scene. Both children and elderly patients received fewer therapeutic interventions on average than adults. More elderly patients died during the clinical course, and their outcome was worse overall, whereas the children had the lowest mortality rate. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, a large patient population was used to demonstrate that both elderly patients and children may have received less invasive treatment compared with adults who were injured with exactly the same severity (with the outcomes of these two groups being opposite to each other). Future studies and recommendations should urgently consider the different age groups.

[Prehospital management in trauma patients and the increasing number of helicopter EMS transportations : An epidemiological study of the TraumaRegister DGU®]. / Präklinisches Management bei Traumapatienten und die zunehmende Zahl von Helikopter-Rettungstransporten : Eine epidemiologische Studie des TraumaRegister DGU®.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To compare the prehospital treatment modalities and intervention regimens for major trauma patients with comparable injury patterns between Austria and Germany. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This analysis is based on data retrieved from the TraumaRegister DGU®. Data included severely injured trauma patients with an injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 16, an age ≥ 16 years, and who were primarily admitted to an Austrian (n = 4186) or German (n = 41,484) level I trauma center (TC) from 2008 to 2017. Investigated endpoints included prehospital times and interventions performed until final hospital admission. RESULTS: The cumulative time for transportation from the site of the accident to the hospital did not significantly differ between the countries (62 min in Austria, 65 min in Germany). Overall, 53% of all trauma patients in Austria were transported to the hospital with a helicopter compared to 37% in Germany (p < 0.001). The rate of intubation was 48% in both countries, the number of chest tubes placed (5.7% Germany, 4.9% Austria), and the frequency of administered catecholamines (13.4% Germany, 12.3% Austria) were comparable (Φ = 0.00). Hemodynamic instability (systolic blood pressure, BP ≤ 90 mmHg) upon arrival in the TC was higher in Austria (20.6% vs. 14.7% in Germany; p < 0.001). A median of 500 mL of fluid was administered in Austria, whereas in Germany 1000 mL was infused (p < 0.001). Patient demographics did not reveal a relationship (Φ = 0.00) between both countries, and the majority of patients sustained a blunt trauma (96%). The observed ASA score of 3-4 was 16.8% in Germany versus 11.9% in Austria. CONCLUSION: Significantly more helicopter EMS transportations (HEMS) were carried out in Austria. The authors suggest implementing international guidelines to explicitly use the HEMS system for trauma patients only a) for the rescue/care of people who have had an accident or are in life-threatening situations, b) for the transport of emergency patients with ISS > 16, c) for transportation of rescue or recovery personnel to hard to reach regions or, d) for the transport of medicinal products, especially blood products, organ transplants or medical devices.

[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the care of major trauma patients: analysis from the TraumaRegister DGU®]. / Auswirkung der COVID-19-Pandemie auf die Versorgung von Schwerverletzten: Analyse aus dem TraumaRegister DGU®.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of major trauma patients requires intensive care capacity, which is a critical resource particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze the impact on major trauma care considering the intensive care treatment of COVID-19 positive patients. METHODS: Demographic, prehospital, and intensive care treatment data from the TraumaRegister DGU® of the German Trauma Society (DGU) in 2019 and 2020 were analyzed. Only major trauma patients from the state of Bavaria were included. Inpatient treatment data of COVID-19 patients in Bavaria in 2020 were obtained using IVENA eHealth. RESULTS: In total, 8307 major trauma patients were treated in the state of Bavaria in the time period investigated. The number of patients in 2020 (n = 4032) compared to 2019 (n = 4275) was not significantly decreased (p = 0.4). Regarding COVID-19 case numbers, maximum values were reached in the months of April and December with more than 800 intensive care unit (ICU) patients per day. In the critical period (> 100 patients with COVID-19 on ICU), a prolonged rescue time was evident (64.8 ± 32.5 vs. 67.4 ± 30.6 min; p = 0.003). The length of stay and ICU treatment of major trauma patients were not negatively affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: The intensive medical care of major trauma patients could be ensured during the high-incidence phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. The prolonged prehospital rescue times show possible optimization potential of the horizontal integration of prehospital and hospital.

Gender-related differences in adults concerning frequency, survival and treatment quality after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA): An observational cohort study from the German resuscitation registry.

BACKGROUND: In Germany approximately 20,500 women and 41,000 men were resuscitated after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) each year. We are currently experiencing a discussion about the possible undersupply of women in healthcare. The aim of the present study was to examine the prevalence of OHCA in Germany, as well as the outcome and quality of resuscitation care for both women and men. METHODS: We present a cohort study from the German Resuscitation Registry (2006-2022). The quality of care was assessed for both EMS and hospital care based on risk-adjusted survival rates with the endpoints: "hospital admission with return of spontaneous circulation" (ROSCadmission) for all patients and "discharge with favourable neurological recovery" (CPC1/2discharge) for all admitted patients. Risk adjustment was performed using logistic regression analysis (LRA). If sex was significantly associated with survival, a matched-pairs-analysis (MPA) followed to explore the frequency of guideline adherence. RESULTS: 58,798 patients aged ≥ 18 years with OHCA and resuscitation were included (men = 65.2%, women = 34.8%). In the prehospital phase the male gender was associated with lower ROSCadmission-rate (LRA: OR = 0.79, CI = 0.759-0.822). A total of 27,910 patients were admitted. During hospital care, men demonstrated a better prognosis (OR = 1.10; CI = 1.015-1.191). MPA revealed a more intensive therapy for men both during EMS and hospital care. Looking at the complete chain of survival, LRA revealed no difference for men and women concerning CPC1/2discharge (n = 58,798; OR = 0.95; CI = 0.888-1.024). CONCLUSION: In Germany, 80% more men than women experience OHCA. The prognosis for CPC1/2discharge remains low (men = 10.5%, women = 7.1%), but comparable after risk adjustment. There is evidence of undersupply of care for women during hospital treatment, which could be associated with a worse prognosis. Further investigations are required to clarify these findings.

Use of angioembolization, treatment modalities and mortality in association with blunt liver trauma in Germany - a data analysis of the TraumaRegister DGU®.

PURPOSE: Angioembolization (ANGIO) is highly valued in national and international guideline recommendations as a treatment adjunct with blunt liver trauma (BLT). The literature on BLT shows that treatment, regardless of the severity of liver injury, can be accomplished with a high success rate using nonoperative management (NOM). An indication for surgical therapy (SURG) is only seen in hemodynamically instable patients. For Germany, it is unclear how frequently NOM ± ANGIO is actually used, and what mortality is associated with BLT. METHODS: A retrospective systematic data analysis of patients with BLT from the TraumaRegister DGU® was performed. All patients with liver injury AIS ≥ 2 between 2015 and 2020 were included. The focus was to evaluate the use ANGIO as well as treatment selection (NOM vs. SURG) and mortality in relation to liver injury severity. Furthermore, independent risk factors influencing mortality were identified, using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 2353 patients with BLT were included in the analysis. ANGIO was used in 18 cases (0.8%). NOM was performed in 70.9% of all cases, but mainly in less severe liver trauma (AIS ≤ 2, abbreviated injury scale). Liver injuries AIS ≥ 3 were predominantly treated surgically (64.6%). Overall mortality associated with BLT was 16%. Severity of liver injury ≥ AIS 3, age > 60 years, hemodynamic instability (INSTBL), and mass transfusion (≥ 10 packed red blood cells/pRBC) were identified as independent risk factors contributing to mortality in BLT. CONCLUSION: ANGIO is rarely used in BLT, contrary to national and international guideline recommendations. In Germany, liver injuries AIS ≥ 3 are still predominantly treated surgically. BLT is associated with considerable mortality, depending on the presence of specific contributing risk factors.

Predicting Genitourinary Injuries in Polytraumatized Patients-Development of the GUIPP Scoring System.

BACKGROUND: The genitourinary system is not as commonly affected as many other organ systems in severely injured patients. Although a delayed and missed diagnosis of genitourinary injuries (GUIs) can severely compromise long-term outcomes, these injuries are frequently overlooked. Therefore, we present a scoring system designed to assist emergency physicians in diagnosing GUIs in severely injured patients. METHODS: The data were obtained from the TraumaRegister DGU® from the years 2015-2021. All severely injured patients (ISS ≥ 16) ≥16 years of age and treated in Germany, Austria, or Switzerland were included in this study. We excluded patients who were transferred out early (48 h), and all patients with isolated traumatic brain injury. After the univariate analysis of the relevant predictive factors, we developed a scoring system using a binary logistic regression model. RESULTS: A total of 70,467 patients were included in this study, of which 4760 (6.8%) sustained a GUI. Male patients (OR: 1.31, 95% CI [1.22, 1.41]) injured in motorcycle accidents (OR: 1.70, 95% CI [1.55, 1.87]), who were under 60 years of age (OR: 1.59, 95% CI [1.49, 1.71]) and had sustained injuries in multiple body regions (OR: 6.63, 95% CI [5.88, 7.47]), and suffered severe pelvic girdle injuries (OR: 2.58, 95% CI [2.29, 2.91]) had the highest odds of sustaining a GUI. With these predictive factors combined, a novel scoring system, the GUIPP score, was developed. It showed good validity, with an AUC of 0.722 (95% CI [0.71; 0.73]). CONCLUSION: Predicting GUI in severely injured patients remains a challenge for treating physicians, but is extremely important to prevent poor outcomes for affected patients. The GUIPP score can be utilized to initiate appropriate diagnostic steps early on in order to reduce the delayed and missed diagnosis of GUI, with scores ≥ 9 points making GUIs very likely.

Timing of Spinal Surgery in Polytrauma: The Relevance of Injury Severity, Injury Level and Associated Injuries.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective database analysis. OBJECTIVE: Polytraumatized patients with spinal injuries require tailor-made treatment plans. Severity of both spinal and concomitant injuries determine timing of spinal surgery. Aim of this study was to evaluate the role of spinal injury localization, severity and concurrent injury patterns on timing of surgery and subsequent outcome. METHODS: The TraumaRegister DGU® was utilized and patients, aged ≥16 years, with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥16 and diagnosed with relevant spinal injuries (abbreviated injury scale, AIS ≥ 3) were selected. Concurrent spinal and non-spinal injuries were analysed and the relation between injury severity, concurrent injury patterns and timing of spinal surgery was determined. RESULTS: 12.596 patients with a mean age of 50.8 years were included. 7.2% of patients had relevant multisegmental spinal injuries. Furthermore, 50% of patients with spine injuries AIS ≥3 had a more severe non-spinal injury to another body part. ICU and hospital stay were superior in patients treated within 48 hrs for lumbar and thoracic spinal injuries. In cervical injuries early intervention (<48 hrs) was associated with increased mortality rates (9.7 vs 6.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The current multicentre study demonstrates that polytrauma patients frequently sustain multiple spinal injuries, and those with an index spine injury may therefore benefit from standardized whole-spine imaging. Moreover, timing of surgical spinal surgery and outcome appear to depend on the severity of concomitant injuries and spinal injury localization. Future prospective studies are needed to identify trauma characteristics that are associated with improved outcome upon early or late spinal surgery.

Parameters predicting postoperative pain and quality of life after hemorrhoidectomy: follow-up results from a prospective multicenter randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Pain and reduced quality of life (QoL) are major subjects of interest after surgery for hemorrhoids. The aim of this study was to find predictive parameters for postoperative pain and QoL after hemorrhoidectomy. METHODS: This is a follow-up analysis of data derived from a multicenter randomized controlled trial including 770 patients, which examines the usefulness of tamponade after hemorrhoidectomy. Different pre-, intra-, and postoperative parameters were correlated with pain level assessed by NRS and QoL by the EuroQuol. RESULTS: At univariate analysis, relevant (NRS > 5/10 pts.) early pain within 48 h after surgery was associated with young age (≤ 40 years, p = 0.0072), use of a tamponade (p < 0.0001), relevant preoperative pain (p = 0.0017), pudendal block (p < 0.0001), and duration of surgery (p = 0.0149). At multivariate analysis, not using a pudendal block (OR 2.64), younger age (OR 1.55), use of a tamponade (OR 1.70), and relevant preoperative pain (OR 1.56) were significantly associated with relevant early postoperative pain. Relevant pain on day 7 was significantly associated only with relevant early pain (OR 3.13, p < 0.001). QoL overall remained at the same level. However, n = 229 (33%) patients presented an improvement of QoL and n = 245 (36%) an aggravation. Improvement was associated with a reduction of pain levels after surgery (p < 0.0001) and analgesia with opioids (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Early relevant pain affects younger patients but can be prevented by avoiding tamponades and using a pudendal block. Relevant pain after 1 week is associated only with early pain. Relief in preexisting pain and opioids improve QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00011590 12 April 2017.

The pelvic vascular injury score (P-VIS): a prehospital instrument to detect significant vascular injury in pelvic fractures.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify predictive factors for peri-pelvic vascular injury in patients with pelvic fractures and to incorporate these factors into a pelvic vascular injury score (P-VIS) to detect severe bleeding during the prehospital trauma management. METHODS: To identify potential predictive factors, data were taken (1) of a Level I Trauma Centre with 467 patients (ISS ≥ 16 and AISPelvis ≥ 3). Analysis including patient's charts and digital recordings, radiographical diagnostics, mechanism and pattern of injury as well as the vascular bleeding source was performed. Statistical analysis was performed descriptively and through inference statistical calculation. To further analyse the predictive factors and finally develop the score, a 10-year time period (2012-2021) of (2) the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU) was used in a second step. Relevant peri-pelvic bleeding in patients with AISPelvis ≥ 3 (N = 9227) was defined as a combination of the following entities (target group PVITR-DGU N = 2090; 22.7%): pelvic fracture with significant bleeding (> 20% of blood volume), Injury of the iliac or femoral artery or blood transfusion of ≥ 6 units (pRBC) prior to ICU admission. The multivariate analysis revealed nine items that constitute the pelvic vascular injury score (P-VIS). RESULTS: In study (1), 467 blunt pelvic trauma patients were included of which 24 (PVI) were presented with significant vascular injury (PVI, N = 24; control (C, N = 443). Patients with pelvic fractures and vascular injury showed a higher ISS, lower haemoglobin at admission and lower blood pressure. Their mortality rate was higher (PVI: 17.4%, C: 10.3%). In the defining and validating process of the score within the TR-DGU, 9227 patients met the inclusion criteria. 2090 patients showed significant peripelvic vascular injury (PVITR-DGU), the remaining 7137 formed the control group (CTR-DGU). Nine predictive parameters for peripelvic vascular injury constituted the peripelvic vascular injury score (P-VIS): age ≥ 70 years, high-energy-trauma, penetrating trauma/open pelvic injury, shock index ≥ 1, cardio-pulmonary-resuscitation (CPR), substitution of > 1 l fluid, intubation, necessity of catecholamine substitution, remaining shock (≤ 90 mmHg) under therapy. The multi-dimensional scoring system leads to an ordinal scaled rating according to the probability of the presence of a vascular injury. A score of ≥ 3 points described the peripelvic vascular injury as probable, a result of ≥ 6 points identified a most likely vascular injury and a score of 9 points identified an apparent peripelvic vascular injury. Reapplying this score to the study population a median score of 5 points (range 3-8) (PVI) and a median score of 2 points (range 0-3) (C) (p < 0.001). The OR for peripelvic vascular injury was 24.3 for the patients who scored > 3 points vs. ≤ 2 points. The TR-DGU data set verified these findings (median of 2 points in CTR-DGU vs. median of 3 points with in PVITR-DGU). CONCLUSION: The pelvic vascular injury score (P-VIS) allows an initial risk assessment for the presence of a vascular injury in patients with unstable pelvic injury. Thus, the management of these patients can be positively influenced at a very early stage, prehospital resuscitation performed safely targeted and further resources can be activated in the final treating Trauma Centre.

Which Moisturizer to Use in Scar Therapy after Burn Injuries? A Subjective and Objective Skin and Scar Evaluation after Topical Treatment with Dexpanthenol, Aloe Vera, and Plant Oil.

Background and Objectives: Good scar management in burn care is essential. Nevertheless, there are no consistent recommendations regarding moisturizers for scar management. Our aim was to investigate and compare the effects of commonly used products on normal skin and burn scars. Materials and Methods: A total of 30 skin-healthy (control group) and 12 patients with burn scars were included in this study. For an intraindividual comparison, each participant received creams consisting of dexpanthenol (P), aloe vera (A), and a natural plant oil (O) with instructions to apply them daily to a previously defined area for at least 28 days. Objective scar evaluation was performed with Visioscan®; Tewameter®; Cutometer®, and the Oxygen To See® device. Subjective evaluation was performed with an "application" questionnaire, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), and with the "best of three" questionnaire. Results: After (A) a high trend of amelioration of +30%, TEWL was detected on the scar area. Blood flow increased slightly on healthy skin areas after (A) application to +104%. The application of (A) on healthy skin demonstrated a positive effect on the parameters of scaliness (+22%, p < 0.001), softness (+14%, p = 0.046), roughness R1 (+16%, p < 0.001) and R2 (+17%, p = 0.000), volume (+22%, p < 0.001), and surface area (+7%, p < 0.001) within the control group. After (P), a significant improvement of the baseline firmness parameter of +14.7% was detected (p = 0.007). (P) also showed a beneficial effect on the parameters of R1 (+7%, p = 0.003), R2 (+6%, p = 0.001), and volume (+17%, p = 0.001). (O) lead to a statistically significant improvement of volume (+15%, p = 0.009). Overall, most study participants stated (A) to be the "best of three". Conclusions: (A) performed statistically best, and is a well-tolerated moisturizing product. However, further quantitative studies are needed to provide statistically significant clarification for uniform recommendations for scar therapy.