TY - JOUR
T1 - Damage control resuscitation in combination with damage control laparotomy
T2 - A survival advantage
AU - Duchesne, Juan C.
AU - Kimonis, Katerina
AU - Marr, Alan B.
AU - Rennie, Kelly V.
AU - Wahl, Georgia
AU - Wells, Joel
AU - Islam, Tareq M.
AU - Meade, Peter
AU - Stuke, Lance
AU - Barbeau, James M.
AU - Hunt, John P.
AU - Baker, Christopher C.
AU - McSwain, Norman E.
PY - 2010/7
Y1 - 2010/7
N2 - Background: Damage control laparotomy (DCL) improves outcomes when used in patients with severe hemorrhage. Correction of coagulopathy with close ratio resuscitation while limiting crystalloid forms a new methodology known as damage control resuscitation (DCR). We hypothesize a survival advantage in DCL patients managed with DCR when compared with DCL patients managed with conventional resuscitation efforts (CRE). Methods: This study is a 4-year retrospective study of all DCL patients who required ≥10 units of packed red blood cells (PRBC) during surgery. A 2-year period after institution of DCR (DCL and DCR) was compared with the preceding 2 years (DCL and CRE). Univariate analysis of continuous data was done with Student's t test followed by multiple logistic regression. Results: One Hundred twenty-four and 72 patients were managed during the DCL and CRE and DCL and DCR time periods, respectively. Baseline patient characteristics of age, Injury Severity Score, % penetrating, blood pressure, hemoglobin, base deficit, and INR were similar between groups. There was no difference in quantity of intraoperative PRBC utilization between DCL and CRE and DCL and DCR study periods: 21.7 units versus 25.5 units (p = 0.53); however, when compared with DCL and CRE group, patients in the DCL and DCR group received less intraoperative crystalloids, 4.7 L versus 14.2 L (p = 0.009); more fresh frozen plasma (FFP), 18.2 versus 6.4 (p = 0.002); a closer FFP to PRBC ratio, 1 to 1.2 versus 1 to 4.2 (p = 0.002); platelets to PRBC ratio, 1:2.3 versus 1:5.9 (0.002); shorter mean trauma intensive care unit length of stay, 11 days versus 20 days (p = 0.01); and greater 30-day survival, 73.6% versus 54.8% (p < 0.009). The addition of DCR to DCL conveyed a survival benefit (odds ratio; 95% confidence interval: 0.19 (0.05-0.33), p = 0.005). Conclusion: This is the first civilian study that analyses the impact of DCR in patients managed with DCL. During the DCL and DCR study period more PRBC, FFP, and platelets with less crystalloid solution was used intraoperatively. DCL and DCR were associated with a survival advantage and shorter trauma intensive care unit length of stay in patients with severe hemorrhage when compared with DCL and CRE.
AB - Background: Damage control laparotomy (DCL) improves outcomes when used in patients with severe hemorrhage. Correction of coagulopathy with close ratio resuscitation while limiting crystalloid forms a new methodology known as damage control resuscitation (DCR). We hypothesize a survival advantage in DCL patients managed with DCR when compared with DCL patients managed with conventional resuscitation efforts (CRE). Methods: This study is a 4-year retrospective study of all DCL patients who required ≥10 units of packed red blood cells (PRBC) during surgery. A 2-year period after institution of DCR (DCL and DCR) was compared with the preceding 2 years (DCL and CRE). Univariate analysis of continuous data was done with Student's t test followed by multiple logistic regression. Results: One Hundred twenty-four and 72 patients were managed during the DCL and CRE and DCL and DCR time periods, respectively. Baseline patient characteristics of age, Injury Severity Score, % penetrating, blood pressure, hemoglobin, base deficit, and INR were similar between groups. There was no difference in quantity of intraoperative PRBC utilization between DCL and CRE and DCL and DCR study periods: 21.7 units versus 25.5 units (p = 0.53); however, when compared with DCL and CRE group, patients in the DCL and DCR group received less intraoperative crystalloids, 4.7 L versus 14.2 L (p = 0.009); more fresh frozen plasma (FFP), 18.2 versus 6.4 (p = 0.002); a closer FFP to PRBC ratio, 1 to 1.2 versus 1 to 4.2 (p = 0.002); platelets to PRBC ratio, 1:2.3 versus 1:5.9 (0.002); shorter mean trauma intensive care unit length of stay, 11 days versus 20 days (p = 0.01); and greater 30-day survival, 73.6% versus 54.8% (p < 0.009). The addition of DCR to DCL conveyed a survival benefit (odds ratio; 95% confidence interval: 0.19 (0.05-0.33), p = 0.005). Conclusion: This is the first civilian study that analyses the impact of DCR in patients managed with DCL. During the DCL and DCR study period more PRBC, FFP, and platelets with less crystalloid solution was used intraoperatively. DCL and DCR were associated with a survival advantage and shorter trauma intensive care unit length of stay in patients with severe hemorrhage when compared with DCL and CRE.
KW - Adipose tissue
KW - Body composition
KW - Growth
KW - Infant
KW - Newborn
KW - Obesity
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77954690768&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77954690768&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181df91fa
DO - 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181df91fa
M3 - Article
C2 - 20622577
AN - SCOPUS:77954690768
SN - 0022-5282
VL - 69
SP - 46
EP - 52
JO - Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care
JF - Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care
IS - 1
ER -