Courtney H Meyer, Andrew Beckett, Bradley M Dennis, Juan Duchesne, Rishi Kundi, Urmil Pandya, Ryan Lawless, Ernest Moore, Chance Spalding, William M Vassy, Jonathan Nguyen
{"title":"pREBOA versus ER-REBOA impact on blood utilization and resuscitation requirements: A pilot analysis.","authors":"Courtney H Meyer, Andrew Beckett, Bradley M Dennis, Juan Duchesne, Rishi Kundi, Urmil Pandya, Ryan Lawless, Ernest Moore, Chance Spalding, William M Vassy, Jonathan Nguyen","doi":"10.1097/TA.0000000000004391","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Partial occlusion of the aorta is a resuscitation technique designed to maximize proximal perfusion while allowing a graduated amount of distal flow to reduce the ischemic sequelae associated with complete aortic occlusion. The pREBOA-PRO catheter affords the ability to titrate perfusion as hemodynamics allows; however, the impact of this new technology for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) on blood use and other resuscitative requirements is currently unknown. We hypothesize that patients undergoing REBOA with the pREBOA-PRO catheter will utilize partial occlusion, when appropriate, and decrease overall resuscitative requirements when compared to patients undergoing REBOA with the ER-REBOA catheter.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The entire American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry was used to compare resuscitation requirements between all ER-REBOA and pREBOA. Unpaired t tests were used to compare resuscitation strategies including packed red blood cells (PRBCs), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), platelets, cryoprecipitate, crystalloids, and need for pressors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When comparing ER-REBOA (n = 800) use to pREBOA (n = 155), initial patient presentations were similar except for age (44 years vs. 40 years, p = 0.026) and rates of blunt injury (78.4% vs. 78.7% p < 0.010). Zone 1 occlusion was used less often in ER-REBOA (65.8 vs. 71.7, p = 0.046). Partial occlusion was performed in 85% of pREBOA compared with 11% in ER-REBOA ( p < 0.050). Vitals at the time of REBOA were worse in ER-REBOA and received significantly more units of PRBCs, FFP, platelets, and liters of crystalloids than pREBOA ( p < 0.05). Rates of ARDS and septic shock were lower in pREBOA ( p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When comparing pREBOA to ER-REBOA, there has been a rise in Zone 1 and partial occlusion. In our pilot analysis of the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry, there was a reduction in administration of PRBCs, FFP, platelets, and crystalloids. Although further prospective studies are required, this is the first to demonstrate an association between pREBOA, partial occlusion, and reduced blood use and resuscitative requirements.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":17453,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"87-93"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576480/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004391","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Partial occlusion of the aorta is a resuscitation technique designed to maximize proximal perfusion while allowing a graduated amount of distal flow to reduce the ischemic sequelae associated with complete aortic occlusion. The pREBOA-PRO catheter affords the ability to titrate perfusion as hemodynamics allows; however, the impact of this new technology for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) on blood use and other resuscitative requirements is currently unknown. We hypothesize that patients undergoing REBOA with the pREBOA-PRO catheter will utilize partial occlusion, when appropriate, and decrease overall resuscitative requirements when compared to patients undergoing REBOA with the ER-REBOA catheter.
Methods: The entire American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry was used to compare resuscitation requirements between all ER-REBOA and pREBOA. Unpaired t tests were used to compare resuscitation strategies including packed red blood cells (PRBCs), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), platelets, cryoprecipitate, crystalloids, and need for pressors.
Results: When comparing ER-REBOA (n = 800) use to pREBOA (n = 155), initial patient presentations were similar except for age (44 years vs. 40 years, p = 0.026) and rates of blunt injury (78.4% vs. 78.7% p < 0.010). Zone 1 occlusion was used less often in ER-REBOA (65.8 vs. 71.7, p = 0.046). Partial occlusion was performed in 85% of pREBOA compared with 11% in ER-REBOA ( p < 0.050). Vitals at the time of REBOA were worse in ER-REBOA and received significantly more units of PRBCs, FFP, platelets, and liters of crystalloids than pREBOA ( p < 0.05). Rates of ARDS and septic shock were lower in pREBOA ( p < 0.05).
Conclusion: When comparing pREBOA to ER-REBOA, there has been a rise in Zone 1 and partial occlusion. In our pilot analysis of the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry, there was a reduction in administration of PRBCs, FFP, platelets, and crystalloids. Although further prospective studies are required, this is the first to demonstrate an association between pREBOA, partial occlusion, and reduced blood use and resuscitative requirements.
Level of evidence: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery® is designed to provide the scientific basis to optimize care of the severely injured and critically ill surgical patient. Thus, the Journal has a high priority for basic and translation research to fulfill this objectives. Additionally, the Journal is enthusiastic to publish randomized prospective clinical studies to establish care predicated on a mechanistic foundation. Finally, the Journal is seeking systematic reviews, guidelines and algorithms that incorporate the best evidence available.