Search

Importance: Early administration of supplemental oxygen for all severely injured trauma patients is recommended, but liberal oxygen treatment has been associated with increased risk of death and respiratory complications., Objective: To determine whether an early 8-hour restrictive oxygen strategy compared with a liberal oxygen strategy in adult trauma patients would reduce death and/or major respiratory complications., Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized controlled trial enrolled adult trauma patients transferred directly to hospitals, triggering a full trauma team activation with an anticipated hospital stay of a minimum of 24 hours from December 7, 2021, to September 12, 2023. This multicenter trial was conducted at 15 prehospital bases and 5 major trauma centers in Denmark, the Netherlands, and Switzerland. The 30-day follow-up period ended on October 12, 2023. The primary outcome was assessed by medical specialists in anesthesia and intensive care medicine blinded to the randomization., Interventions: In the prehospital setting or on trauma center admission, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to a restrictive oxygen strategy (arterial oxygen saturation target of 94%) (n = 733) or liberal oxygen strategy (12-15 L of oxygen per minute or fraction of inspired oxygen of 0.6-1.0) (n = 724) for 8 hours., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of death and/or major respiratory complications within 30 days. The 2 key secondary outcomes, death and major respiratory complications within 30 days, were assessed individually., Results: Among 1979 randomized patients, 1508 completed the trial (median [IQR] age, 50 [31-65] years; 73% male; and median Injury Severity Score was 14 [9-22]). Death and/or major respiratory complications within 30 days occurred in 118 of 733 patients (16.1%) in the restrictive oxygen group and 121 of 724 patients (16.7%) in the liberal oxygen group (odds ratio, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.37]; P = .94; absolute difference, 0.56 percentage points [95% CI, -2.70 to 3.82]). No significant differences were found between groups for each component of the composite outcome. Adverse and serious adverse events were similar across groups, with the exception of atelectasis, which was less common in the restrictive oxygen group compared with the liberal oxygen group (27.6% vs 34.7%, respectively)., Conclusions and Relevance: In adult trauma patients, an early restrictive oxygen strategy compared with a liberal oxygen strategy initiated in the prehospital setting or on trauma center admission for 8 hours did not significantly reduce death and/or major respiratory complications within 30 days., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05146700.

Background: Anticoagulation is essential for the treatment and prevention of thromboembolic events. Current guidelines recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over vitamin K antagonists in DOAC-eligible patients. The major complication of anticoagulation is serious or life-threatening haemorrhage, which may necessitate prompt haemostatic intervention. Reversal of DOACs may also be required for patients in need of urgent invasive procedures. This guideline from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) aims to provide evidence-based recommendations and suggestions on how to manage patients on DOACs undergoing urgent or emergency procedures including the treatment of DOAC-induced bleeding., Design: A systematic literature search was performed, examining four drug comparators (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) and clinical scenarios ranging from planned to emergency surgery with the outcomes of mortality, haematoma growth and thromboembolic complications. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Consensus on the wording of the recommendations was achieved by a Delphi process., Results: So far, no results from prospective randomised trials comparing two active comparators (e.g. a direct reversal agent and an unspecific haemostatic agent such as prothrombin complex concentrate: PCC) have been published yet and the majority of publications were uncontrolled and observational studies. Thus, the certainty of evidence was assessed to be either low or very low (GRADE C). Thirty-five recommendations and clinical practice statements were developed. During the Delphi process, strong consensus (>90% agreement) was achieved in 97.1% of recommendations and consensus (75 to 90% agreement) in 2.9%., Discussion: DOAC-specific coagulation monitoring may help in patients at risk for elevated DOAC levels, whereas global coagulation tests are not recommended to exclude clinically relevant DOAC levels. In urgent clinical situations, haemostatic treatment using either the direct reversal or nonspecific haemostatic agents should be started without waiting for DOAC level monitoring. DOAC levels above 50 ng ml-1 may be considered clinically relevant necessitating haemostatic treatment before urgent or emergency procedures. Before cardiac surgery under activated factor Xa (FXa) inhibitors, the use of andexanet alfa is not recommended because of inhibition of unfractionated heparin, which is needed for extracorporeal circulation. In the situation of DOAC overdose without bleeding, no haemostatic intervention is suggested, instead measures to eliminate the DOACs should be taken. Due to the lack of published results from comparative prospective, randomised studies, the superiority of reversal treatment strategy vs. a nonspecific haemostatic treatment is unclear for most urgent and emergency procedures and bleeding. Due to the paucity of clinical data, no recommendations for the use of recombinant activated factor VII as a nonspecific haemostatic agent can be given., Conclusion: In the clinical scenarios of DOAC intake before urgent procedures and DOAC-induced bleeding, practitioners should evaluate the risk of bleeding of the procedure and the severity of the DOAC-induced bleeding before initiating treatment. Optimal reversal strategy remains to be determined in future trials for most clinical settings., (Copyright © 2024 European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.)

Purpose of Review: Tranexamic acid is routinely used as part of the management of traumatic bleeding. The dose recommendation in trauma was extrapolated from other clinical settings and the results of pragmatic randomized trials rather than pharmaco-kinetic and -dynamic evaluations. The review addresses current evidence on dosing of tranexamic acid in traumatized patients with a focus on efficacy, safety and risk-benefit profile., Recent Findings: A majority, but not all, of existing randomized clinical trials reports a reduction in mortality and/or blood loss with tranexamic acid administration. Increasing dose above the general recommendation (1 g bolus + 1 g infusion/8 h intravenously) has not been shown to further increase efficacy and could potentially increase side effects., Summary: The benefit of tranexamic acid as adjuvant therapy in the management of bleeding trauma patients on mortality and transfusion requirements is clear and well documented, being most effective if given early and to patients with clinical signs of hemorrhagic shock. Recent reports suggest that in some patients presenting with a shutdown of their fibrinolytic pathway the administration of tranexamic acid could be associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events and poor outcomes. A more personalized approach based on bedside assessment of fibrinolytic activation and pharmacokinetic-based dose regimen should be developed moving forward., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A main cause of trauma morbidity and mortality is multiple-organ failure, and endotheliopathy has been implicated. Pilot studies indicate that low-dose prostacyclin improves endothelial functionality in critically ill patients, suggesting that this intervention may improve trauma patient outcome., Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, blinded, clinical investigator-initiated trial in 229 trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock who were randomized 1:1 to 72 hours infusion of the prostacyclin analog iloprost (1 ng/kg/min) or placebo. The primary outcome was the number of intensive care unit (ICU)-free days alive within 28 days of admission. Secondary outcomes included 28-day all-cause mortality and hospital length of stay., Results: The mean number of ICU-free days alive within 28 days was 15.64 days in the iloprost group versus 13.99 days in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference, -1.63 days [95% confidence interval (CI), -4.64 to 1.38 days]; p = 0.28). The 28-day mortality was 18.8% in the iloprost group versus 19.6% in the placebo group (odds ratio, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.51-2.0]; p = 0.97). The mean hospital length of stay was 19.96 days in the iloprost group versus 27.32 days in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference, 7.84 days [95% CI, 1.66-14.02 days], p = 0.01)., Conclusion: Iloprost did not result in a statistically significant increase in the number of ICU-free days alive within 28 days of admission, whereas it was safe and a statistically significant reduction in hospital length of stay was observed. Further research on prostacyclin in shocked trauma patients is warranted., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level II., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma.)