Catastrophic haemorrhage in military major trauma patients: a retrospective database analysis of haemostatic agents used on the battlefield.

Q2 Medicine Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps Pub Date : 2019-12-01 Epub Date: 2018-10-03 DOI:10.1136/jramc-2018-001031
Mark Winstanley, J E Smith, C Wright
{"title":"Catastrophic haemorrhage in military major trauma patients: a retrospective database analysis of haemostatic agents used on the battlefield.","authors":"Mark Winstanley, J E Smith, C Wright","doi":"10.1136/jramc-2018-001031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives Catastrophic haemorrhage is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in trauma, in both military and civilian settings. There are numerous studies looking at the effectiveness of different haemostatic agents in the laboratory but few in a clinical setting. This study analyses the use of haemostatic dressings used in patients injured on the battlefield and their association with survival. Method A retrospective database review was undertaken using the UK Joint Theatre Trauma Registry from 2003 to 2014, during combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Data included patient demographics, the use of haemostatic dressings, New Injury Severity Score (NISS) and patient outcome. Results Of 3792 cases, a haemostatic dressing was applied in 317 (either Celox, Hemcon or Quickclot). When comparing patients who had a haemostatic dressing applied versus no haemostatic agent, there was a 7% improvement in survival. Celox was the only individual haemostatic dressing that was associated with a statistically significant improvement in survival, which was most apparent in the more severely injured (NISS 36–75). Conclusion We have shown an association between use of haemostatic agents and improved survival, mostly in those with more severe injuries, which is particularly evident in those administered Celox. This supports the continued use of haemostatic agents as part of initial haemorrhage control for patients injured in conflict and suggests that civilian organisations that may need to deal with patients with similar injury patterns should consider their use and implementation.","PeriodicalId":17327,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps","volume":"165 6","pages":"405-409"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/jramc-2018-001031","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jramc-2018-001031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/10/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

Objectives Catastrophic haemorrhage is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in trauma, in both military and civilian settings. There are numerous studies looking at the effectiveness of different haemostatic agents in the laboratory but few in a clinical setting. This study analyses the use of haemostatic dressings used in patients injured on the battlefield and their association with survival. Method A retrospective database review was undertaken using the UK Joint Theatre Trauma Registry from 2003 to 2014, during combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Data included patient demographics, the use of haemostatic dressings, New Injury Severity Score (NISS) and patient outcome. Results Of 3792 cases, a haemostatic dressing was applied in 317 (either Celox, Hemcon or Quickclot). When comparing patients who had a haemostatic dressing applied versus no haemostatic agent, there was a 7% improvement in survival. Celox was the only individual haemostatic dressing that was associated with a statistically significant improvement in survival, which was most apparent in the more severely injured (NISS 36–75). Conclusion We have shown an association between use of haemostatic agents and improved survival, mostly in those with more severe injuries, which is particularly evident in those administered Celox. This supports the continued use of haemostatic agents as part of initial haemorrhage control for patients injured in conflict and suggests that civilian organisations that may need to deal with patients with similar injury patterns should consider their use and implementation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
军事重大创伤患者的大出血:战场上使用的止血剂的回顾性数据库分析。
目的:在军事和民用环境中,灾难性出血是创伤发病率和死亡率的主要原因。有许多研究在实验室中观察不同止血剂的有效性,但在临床环境中很少。本研究分析了战场上伤员使用的止血敷料及其与生存的关系。方法:对2003年至2014年在伊拉克和阿富汗作战期间使用英国联合战区创伤登记处进行回顾性数据库审查。数据包括患者人口统计、止血敷料的使用、新损伤严重程度评分(NISS)和患者预后。结果:3792例患者中,317例使用止血敷料(Celox、Hemcon或Quickclot)。当比较使用止血敷料和不使用止血药物的患者时,生存率提高了7%。Celox是唯一一种与统计学意义上的生存改善相关的个体止血敷料,这在更严重的受伤患者中最为明显(NISS 36-75)。结论:我们已经证明了止血药物的使用与生存率的提高之间的联系,主要是在那些更严重的损伤中,这在使用Celox的患者中尤为明显。这支持继续使用止血剂作为冲突中受伤患者初步出血控制的一部分,并建议可能需要处理类似受伤模式患者的民间组织应考虑使用和实施止血剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps
Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps aims to publish high quality research, reviews and case reports, as well as other invited articles, which pertain to the practice of military medicine in its broadest sense. It welcomes material from all ranks, services and corps wherever they serve as well as submissions from beyond the military. It is intended not only to propagate current knowledge and expertise but also to act as an institutional memory for the practice of medicine within the military.
期刊最新文献
Knowledge of blood transfusion practices among medical students and residents. Differential Expression of MSTN Isoforms in Muscle between Broiler and Layer Chickens. Index to Volume LXXV. Museum Notes Twenty Years of Military Prehospital Care in the Eastern Sovereign Base Area, Cyprus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1