Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Motorcyclists are often victims of road traffic incidents. Though elderly patients seem to have worse survival outcomes and sustain more severe injuries than younger patients, concordance in the literature for this does not exist. The aim of the study is to evaluate the impact of age and injury severity on the mortality of patients undergoing motorcycle trauma. Methods Data of 1725 patients consecutively admitted to our Trauma Center were selected from 2002 to 2016 and retrospectively analyzed. The sample was divided into three age groups: ≤ 17 years, 18–54 years, and ≥ 55 years. Mortality rates were analyzed for the overall population and patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 25. Differences in survival among age groups were evaluated with log-rank test, and multivariate logistic regression models were created to identify independent predictors of mortality. Results A lower survival rate was detected in patients older than 55 years (83.6% vs 94.7%, p = 0.049) and in those sustaining critical injuries (ISS ≥ 25, 61% vs 83%, p = 0.021). Age ( p = 0.027, OR 1.03), ISS ( p < 0.001, OR 1.09), and Revised Trauma Score (RTS) ( p < 0.001, OR 0.47) resulted as independent predictors of death. Multivariate analysis identified head ( p < 0.001, OR 2.04), chest ( p < 0.001, OR 1.54), abdominal ( p < 0.001, OR 1.37), and pelvic ( p = 0.014, OR 1.26) injuries as independent risk factors related to mortality as well. Compared to the theoretical probability of survival, patients of all age groups showed a survival advantage when managed at a level I trauma center. Conclusions We detected anatomical injury distributions and mortality rates among three age groups. Patients aging more than 55 years had an increased risk of death, with a prevalence of severe chest injuries, while younger patients sustained more severe head trauma. Age represented an independent predictor of death. Management of these patients at a level I trauma center may lead to improved outcomes.

Backgrounds The COVID-19 pandemic drastically strained the health systems worldwide, obligating the reassessment of how healthcare is delivered. In Lombardia, Italy, a Regional Emergency Committee (REC) was established and the regional health system reorganized, with only three hospitals designated as hubs for trauma care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of this reorganization of regional care, comparing the distribution of patients before and during the COVID-19 outbreak and to describe changes in the epidemiology of severe trauma among the two periods. Methods A cohort study was conducted using retrospectively collected data from the Regional Trauma Registry of Lombardia (LTR). We compared the data of trauma patients admitted to three hub hospitals before the COVID-19 outbreak (September 1 to November 19, 2019) with those recorded during the pandemic (February 21 to May 10, 2020) in the same hospitals. Demographic data, level of pre-hospital care (Advanced Life Support-ALS, Basic Life Support-BLS), type of transportation, mechanism of injury (MOI), abbreviated injury score (AIS, 1998 version), injury severity score (ISS), revised trauma score (RTS), and ICU admission and survival outcome of all the patients admitted to the three trauma centers designed as hubs, were reviewed. Screening for COVID-19 was performed with nasopharyngeal swabs, chest ultrasound, and/or computed tomography. Results During the COVID-19 pandemic, trauma patients admitted to the hubs increased (46.4% vs 28.3%, p < 0.001) with an increase in pre-hospital time (71.8 vs 61.3 min, p < 0.01), while observed in hospital mortality was unaffected. TRISS, ISS, AIS, and ICU admission were similar in both periods. During the COVID-19 outbreak, we observed substantial changes in MOI of severe trauma patients admitted to three hubs, with increases of unintentional (31.9% vs 18.5%, p < 0.05) and intentional falls (8.4% vs 1.2%, p < 0.05), whereas the pandemic restrictions reduced road- related injuries (35.6% vs 60%, p < 0.05). Deaths on scene were significantly increased (17.7% vs 6.8%, p < 0.001). Conclusions The COVID-19 outbreak affected the epidemiology of severe trauma patients. An increase in trauma patient admissions to a few designated facilities with high level of care obtained satisfactory results, while COVID-19 patients overwhelmed resources of most other hospitals.

IntroductionPatients with severe neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD) may undergo the Malone antegrade continence enema (MACE) surgery to perform antegrade bowel irrigation (ABI). The standard approach may be prevented by a previous appendectomy or complicated by appendicular stenoses and/or stomal leakages. We present the experience by our tertiary referral center for NBD, adopting a modified surgical technique, based on a neoappendix with the terminal ileum to preserve the natural anti-reflux mechanism of the ileocecal valve and avoid stool leakage, and a largely available transanal irrigation (TAI) system to catheterize the neoappendix and perform ABI.Case presentationThree individuals with NBD successfully underwent our modified MACE program. Case 1 had cauda equina syndrome. He underwent surgery at 40. Case 2 was a man who suffered from spinal cord dysfunction due to acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, functionally T12 AIS B, at 57. Case 3 was a man with traumatic L1 AIS B paraplegia. At 60 he underwent surgery after 29 years since the injury. He needed a surgical revision due to a postoperative subcutaneous infection. After 121, 84 and 14 months from surgery, the three individuals performed ABI every 2 days, presented functional stomas, had no fecal incontinence, and reported an NBD score of 6, compared to 40, 33 and 35 pre-operatively.DiscussionTo our knowledge, this is the first report of MACE combining a tapered terminal ileum conduit and an adapted TAI system. Our approach proved to be a safe and effective strategy for severe NBD avoiding a colostomy.

Emergency Department Thoracotomy (EDRT) after traumatic Cardio-pulmonary Arrest (CPR) can be used to salvage select critically injured patients. Indications of this surgical procedure are widely debated and changed during last decades. We provide the available literature about EDRT in the effort to provide a comprehensive synthesis about the procedure, likelihood of success and patient’s outcome in the different clinical setting, accepted indications and technical details adopted during the procedure for different trauma injuries. Literature from 1975 to 2020 was retrieved from multiple databases and reviewed. Indications, contraindications, total number and outcome of patients submitted to EDRT were primary endpoints. A total number of 7236 patients received EDRT, but only 7.8% survived. Penetrating trauma and witnessed cardiopulmonary arrest with the presence of vital signs at the trauma center are the most favorable conditions to perform EDRT. EDRT should be reserved for acute resuscitation of selected dying trauma patient. Risks of futility, costs, benefits of the surgical procedure should be carefully evaluated before performing the surgical procedure. •Emergency thoracotomy (ET) is an extreme procedure whose indications are debated.•Anterolateral left thoracotomy and clamshell incision are the most used techniques.•ET in penetrating trauma in patients with witnessed cardiac arrest is associated with a better outcome.•Blunt trauma or prolonged prehospital resuscitation are associated with the worst outcome.•Neurological damage and re-perfusion syndrome are important adverse effects of the ET.

Background An option for emergency control of pelvic hemorrhage is Extra-peritoneal Pelvic Packing (EPP), which addresses the retroperitoneal source of exsanguination in pelvic fractures. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the efficacy of early EPP in reducing mortality due to hemorrhage from pelvic fractures, and to evaluate the impact of packing on transfusion requirements within the first 24 h and ICU length of stay (ICU-LOS). All data pertaining trauma patients admitted from October 2002 and December 2103 with hemodynamic instability and pelvic fractures were selected from the Hospital Trauma Registry. Patients with severe brain injury and bleeding from extra-pelvic sources were excluded. Patient population was divided into two groups: EPP group, including patients admitted from 2009 to 2013, with EPP as part of the treatment algorithm, and NO-EPP group, from 2002 to 2008, without EPP as atherapeutic option. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed on allpatients. Twenty-five patients of each group with similar features were matched using Propensity Score Analysis (PSA). Results Six hundred eighty out of 4659 major trauma (14.6 %) presented a pelvic fracture. In 78 hemodynamically unstable patients (30 in EPP group,48 in NO-EPP group) the major source of bleeding was the pelvis. Among patients selected by PSA early mortality was significantly reduced in EPP group (20 vs 52 %, p  = .03) compared to NO-EPP, notwithstanding similar hemodynamic impairment. No difference was observed in transfusion requirements and ICU-LOS. Conclusions The EPP is a safe and quick procedure, able to improve hemodynamic stabilization and to reduce acute mortality due to hemorrhage in patients with pelvic fracture, in combination with optimized transfusion protocol. EPP may be useful as a bridge for time-consuming procedures, such as angio-embolization.

Identifying groups of patients with homogeneous characteristics and comparable outcomes improves clinical activity, patients’ management, and scientific research. This study aims to define mild, moderate, and severe facial trauma by validating two cut-off values of the Comprehensive Facial Injury (CFI) score and describing their foreseeable clinical needs to create a useful guide in patient management, starting from the first evaluation. The individual CFI score, overall surgical time, and length of hospitalization are calculated for a sample of 1400 facial-injured patients. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis and the corresponding Area Under the Curve (AUC) is tested, and a CFI score ≥4 is selected to discriminate patients undergoing surgical management under general anesthesia (Positive Predictive Value, PPV of 91.4%), while a CFI score ≥10 is selected to identify patients undergoing major surgical procedures (Negative Predictive Value, NPV of 91.7%). These results are enhanced by the consensual trend of Length of Stay outcome. The use of the CFI score allows us to distinguish between the “Mild facial trauma” with a low risk of hospitalization for surgical treatment, the “Moderate facial trauma” with a high probability of surgical treatment, and the “Severe facial trauma” that requires long-lasting surgery and hospital stay, with an increased incidence of Intensive Care Unit admission.

PurposeTo determine whether torso CT can be avoided in patients who experience high-energy blunt trauma but have normal vital signs.MethodsHigh-energy blunt trauma patients with normal vital signs were retrieved retrospectively from our registry. We reviewed 1317 patients (1027 men and 290 women) and 761 (57.8%) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All patients were initially evaluated at the emergency room (ER), with a set of tests, part of a specific protocol. Patients with at least one altered exam at initial examination or after six-hour observation received a torso CECT. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV), and likelihood ratio (LH) of the protocol were evaluated.ResultsOf 761 patients, 354 (46.5%) received torso CECT because of the positive ER test, with 330 being true positive and 24 being false positive. The remaining 407 patients were negative at ER tests and did not receive torso CECT, showing a significantly (P < 0.001) lower Injury Severity Score (ISS). The positive and negative LH of the protocol to detect torso injuries were respectively 16.5 and 0.01 (overall accuracy of 0.96).ConclusionsTorso CT can be avoided without adverse clinical outcomes in patients who experience high-energy blunt trauma, are hemodynamically stable, and have normal initial laboratory and imaging tests.

Background Despite improved awareness of blunt traumatic hollow viscus and mesenteric injuries (THVMI), the accuracy of contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) varies considerably among studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis of test accuracy aims to explore the diagnostic performance of CECT in detecting THVMI in blunt trauma. Methods The study was conducted according to the Cochrane recommendations searching the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library datasets from 2000 to 8 September 2023 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023473041). Surgical exploration, autopsy, and discharge from the hospital after monitoring were set as reference standard. To explore the diagnostic accuracy of CECT in detecting THVMI hierarchical models were developed. The risk of bias in individual studies was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to detect sources of heterogeneity. Results Twelve studies, for a total of 4537 patients, were deemed eligible. After identification of outliers and sensitivity analysis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.85 (95% CI: 0.69–0.93), 0.94 (95% CI: 0.8–0.98), 14.65 (95% CI: 4.22–50.85), 0.16 (95% CI: 0.07–0.34), 92.3 (95% CI: 29.75-286.34), respectively. The Area under the HSROC curve was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92–0.96). Meta-regression analysis identified the year of publication as a covariate significantly associated with heterogeneity. A high risk of bias was detected in the “patient selection” domains. Conclusion CECT has a fundamental role in identifying THVMI with high specificity but suboptimal sensitivity. Clinical criteria are still of paramount importance, especially in cases of ambiguous initial CECT images.

Background Currently, both the step-up approach, combining percutaneous drainage (PD) and video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD), and endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy (ETN) are mini-invasive techniques for infected necrosis in severe acute pancreatitis. A combination of these approaches could maximize the management of necrotizing pancreatitis, conjugating the benefits from both the experiences. However, reporting of this combined strategy is anecdotal. This is the first reported case of severe necrotizing pancreatitis complicated by biliary fistula treated by a combination of ETN, PD, VARD, and endoscopic biliary stenting. Moreover, a systematic literature review of comparative studies on minimally invasive techniques in necrotizing pancreatitis has been provided. Case presentation A 59-year-old patient was referred to our center for acute necrotizing pancreatitis associated with multi-organ failure. No invasive procedures were attempted in the first month from the onset: enteral feeding by a naso-duodenal tube was started, and antibiotics were administered to control sepsis. After 4 weeks, CT scans showed a central walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) of pancreatic head communicating bilateral retroperitoneal collections. ETN was performed, and bile leakage was found at the right margin of the WOPN. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography confirmed the presence of a choledocal fistula within the WOPN, and a biliary stent was placed. An ultrasound-guided PD was performed on the left retroperitoneal collection. Due to the subsequent repeated onset of septic shocks and the evidence of size increase of the right retroperitoneal collection, a VARD was decided. The CT scans documented the resolution of all the collections, and the patient promptly recovered from sepsis. After 6 months, the patient is in good clinical condition. Conclusions No mini-invasive technique has demonstrated significantly better outcomes over the others, and each technique has specific indications, advantages, and pitfalls. Indeed, ETN could be suitable for central WOPNs, while VARD or PD could be suggested for lateral collections. A combination of different approaches is feasible and could significantly optimize the clinical management in critically ill patients affected by complicated necrotizing pancreatitis.

Background Emergency surgery represents a unique context. Trauma teams are often multidisciplinary and need to operate under extreme stress and time constraints, sometimes with no awareness of the trauma’s causes or the patient’s personal and clinical information. In this perspective, the dynamics of how trauma teams function is fundamental to ensuring the best performance and outcomes. Methods An online survey was conducted among the World Society of Emergency Surgery members in early 2021. 402 fully filled questionnaires on the topics of knowledge translation dynamics and tools, non-technical skills, and difficulties in teamwork were collected. Data were analyzed using the software R, and reported following the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). Results Findings highlight how several surgeons are still unsure about the meaning and potential of knowledge translation and its mechanisms. Tools like training, clinical guidelines, and non-technical skills are recognized and used in clinical practice. Others, like patients’ and stakeholders’ engagement, are hardly implemented, despite their increasing importance in the modern healthcare scenario. Several difficulties in working as a team are described, including the lack of time, communication, training, trust, and ego. Discussion Scientific societies should take the lead in offering training and support about the abovementioned topics. Dedicated educational initiatives, practical cases and experiences, workshops and symposia may allow mitigating the difficulties highlighted by the survey’s participants, boosting the performance of emergency teams. Additional investigation of the survey results and its characteristics may lead to more further specific suggestions and potential solutions.