Search

Copyright of Annales Françaises de Médecine d'Urgence is the property of John Libbey Eurotext Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Annales Françaises de Médecine d'Urgence is the property of John Libbey Eurotext Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Drowning is still a major cause of accidental death worldwide. In 1997, Szpilman proposed a classification of drowning that has become the reference. As considerable efforts have been made to improve prevention and care, it seemed appropriate to reassess the prognosis and clinical presentation of drowning patients more than 20 years after this first publication. The aim of this study is to provide a reappraisal of patients who need advanced health care and a precise description of their respective neurologic, respiratory, and hemodynamic profiles.Methods: This retrospective study was conducted over four consecutive summer periods between 2014 and 2017 in ICUs located in France, French Polynesia, and the French Antilles. Patients were classified according to the drowning classification system proposed by Szpilman.Results: During the study period, 312 drowning patients were admitted with severe clinical presentation (grades 2-6). All patients benefited from rapid extraction from the water (< 10 min for all) and specialized care (emergency medical services), starting from the prehospital period. Although the global hospital mortality was similar to that previously reported (18.5%), great differences existed among the severity grades. Respective grade mortalities were low for grades 2 through 5 (grade 2, 0%; grade 3, 3%; grade 4, 0%; grade 5, 2%), and the mortality for grade 6 remained similar to that previously reported (54%). These results confirmed that the occurrence of cardiac arrest after drowning is still bad prognosis. Conversely, for other grades, this study strengthens the importance of specialized intervention to interrupt the drowning process.Conclusions: On the basis of these results, drowning-related cardiac arrest is still the prognosis cornerstone. For other victims, the prognosis was better than previously expected, which strengthens the importance of specialized intervention to interrupt the drowning process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Several prehospital major trauma patient triage scores have been developed, the triage revised trauma score (T-RTS), Vittel criteria, Mechanism/Glasgow Coma Scale/Age/Systolic blood pressure score (MGAP), and the new trauma score (NTS). These scoring schemes allow a rapid and accurate prognostic assessment of the severity of potential lesions. The aim of our study was to compare these scores with in-hospital mortality predictions in a cohort of consecutive trauma patients admitted in a Level 1 trauma center. Materials: Between 2013 and 2016, 1,112 patients were admitted to the "major trauma" spinneret of a Level 1 trauma center in the south of France. All prehospital data needed to calculate the T-RTS, Vittel criteria, the MGAP score, and the NTS were collected. The main evaluation criterion was in-hospital mortality at 30 days for all causes. The predictive performances of these scores were evaluated and compared with each other using the analysis of the receiver operating curves. Results: A total of 1,001 patients were included in the analysis, 238 (24%) females, aged 43 ± 19 years with ISS 15 ± 13. The area under the curve was for each score: T-RTS, AUC = 0.84, [0.82–0.87]; Vittel criteria, AUC = 0.87 [0.85–0.89]; MGAP score, AUC = 0.91 [0.89–0.92] and NTS, AUC = 0.90 [0.88–0.92]. By comparing the ROC curves of these scores, the MGAP and NTS scores were statistically higher than the T-RTS. With the current thresholds, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of these scores were 91%, 35%, 10%, 98% for T-RTS, 100%, 2%, 8%, 100% for Vittel criteria, 91%, 71%, 24%, 99% for MGAP score, 82%, 86%, 33%, 98% for NTS. Only Vittel's criteria allowed undertriage below 5% as recommended by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT). Conclusion: The comparison of these different triage scores concluded with a superiority of the MGAP and NTS scores compared with the T-RTS. Including the calculation of MGAP or NTS scores with the Vittel criteria would reduce the risk of overtriage in the Level 1 trauma centers by further directing patients at low risk of death to a lower-level trauma facility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]