Over the last two decades, experimental and clinical data have begun to shape a more discriminating approach to intravascular (IV) fluid infusions in the resuscitation of trauma patients with presumed internal hemorrhage. This approach takes into account the presence of potentially uncontrollable hemorrhage (e.g., deep intra-abdominal or intra-thoracic injury) versus a controllable source (e.g. distal extremity wound). This limitation on fluid resuscitation is particularly applicable in the case of patients with penetrating truncal injury being transported rapidly to a nearby definitive care center. Meanwhile, longstanding debates over the type of fluid that should be infused remain largely unresolved and further complicated by recent clinical trials that did not demonstrate support for either hemoglobinbased oxygen carriers or hypertonic saline. However, there is also growing evidence that does support the increased use of fresh frozen plasma as well as tourniquets, and intra-osseous devices. While a more discriminating approach to fluid infusions have evolved, it has also become clear that positive pressure ventilatory support should be limited in the face of potential severe hemorrhage due to the accompanying reductions in venous return. Controversies over prehospital endotracheal tube placement are confounded by this factor as well as the effects of paramedic deployment strategies and related skills usage. Beyond these traditional areas of focus, a number of very compelling clinical observations and an extensive body of experimental data has generated a very persuasive argument that intravenous estrogen and progesterone may be of value in trauma management, particularly severe traumatic brain injury and burns. (Minerva Anestesiol 2011;77:993-1002).
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||10|
|State||Published - Oct 1 2011|
- Brain injuries
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine