Purpose Sedation management of trauma patients after damage control laparotomy (DCL) has not been optimized. We evaluated if shorter sedation exposure was associated with increased proportion of delirium-free/coma-free (DF/CF-ICU) days and change in time to definitive fascial closure (DFC). Methods We reviewed trauma DCL patients at an ACS-verified level I center over 5 years as shorter (SE) or longer than median (LE) sedation exposure. We compared demographics, injury patterns, hemodynamic parameters, and injury severity between groups. We calculated the propensity for each patient to achieve DFC using age, gender, ISS, red blood cell transfusion, bowel discontinuity, abdominal vascular injury, and time to first takeback; we then determined the effect of sedation exposure on rate of DFC by multivariate Cox regression, adjusted for propensity to achieve DFC. We used linear regression adjusted for age, ISS, head-AIS, bowel discontinuity, and vascular injury to determine the effect of sedation exposure on the proportion of DF/CF-ICU days. Results 65 patients (33.8% penetrating) had mean age 41.8 ± 16.0, ISS 27.1 ± 14.2, Head-AIS 1.2 ± 1.6 and median sedation exposure of 2.2 [IQR 0.78, 7.3] days (35 SE and 30 LE). Pattern and severity of solid organ injuries and proportion of small and large bowel and vascular injuries were similar between groups. LE had more abdominal sepsis (23.3% vs 0%, p = 0.003) and enterocutaneous fistula (16.7% vs 0%, p = 0.016), and more ventilator (17.3 ± 12.7 vs 6.1 ± 6.8, p < 0.001), ICU (20.8 ± 14.2 vs 7.2 ± 7.6, p < 0.001), and hospital days (29.6 ± 19.6 vs 13.9 ± 9.0, p < 0.001). DFC was achieved more rapidly in the SE group (2.0 ± 1.5 days vs 3.9 ± 3.7 days [unadjusted], p = 0.023) and SE had a higher proportion of unadjusted DF/CF-ICU days (33.0 ± 32.0% vs 18.1 ± 16.4%, p = 0.020). SE was associated with an increased proportion of adjusted DF/CF-ICU days by multivariate linear regression (13.1% [95% CI 1.4-24.8%], p = 0.029) and with faster adjusted rate of DFC by multivariate Cox regression (RR 2.28 [95% CI 1.25-4.15, p = 0.007]). Conclusions Shorter sedation exposure is associated with increased proportion of DF/CF-ICU days and more rapid DFC after DCL for trauma.

No abstract

BACKGROUND:Tourniquet use for extremity hemorrhage control has seen a recent increase in civilian usage. Previous retrospective studies demonstrated that tourniquets improve outcomes for major extremity trauma (MET). No prospective study has been conducted to date. The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes in MET patients with prehospital tourniquet use. We hypothesized that prehospital tourniquet use in MET decreases the incidence of patients arriving to the trauma center in shock. METHODS:Data were collected prospectively for adult patients with MET at 26 Level I and 3 Level II trauma centers from 2015 to 2020. Limbs with tourniquets applied in the prehospital setting were included in the tourniquet group and limbs without prehospital tourniquets were enrolled in the control group. RESULTS:A total of 1,392 injured limbs were enrolled with 1,130 tourniquets, including 962 prehospital tourniquets. The control group consisted of 262 limbs without prehospital tourniquets and 88 with tourniquets placed upon hospital arrival. Prehospital improvised tourniquets were placed in 42 patients. Tourniquets effectively controlled bleeding in 87.7% of limbs. Tourniquet and control groups were similarly matched for demographics, Injury Severity Score, and prehospital vital signs ( p > 0.05). Despite higher limb injury severity, patients in the tourniquet group were less likely to arrive in shock compared with the control group (13.0% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.04). The incidence of limb complications was not significantly higher in the tourniquet group ( p > 0.05). CONCLUSION:This study is the first prospective analysis of prehospital tourniquet use for civilian extremity trauma. Prehospital tourniquet application was associated with decreased incidence of arrival in shock without increasing limb complications. We found widespread tourniquet use, high effectiveness, and a low number of improvised tourniquets. This study provides further evidence that tourniquets are being widely and safely adopted to improve outcomes in civilians with MET.