BackgroundCirculatory collapse is a leading cause of mortality among traumatic major exsanguination and in ruptured aortic aneurysm patients. Approximately 40% of patients die before hemorrhage control is achieved. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is an adjunct designed to sustain the circulation until definitive surgical or endovascular repair. A systematic review was conducted for the current clinical use of REBOA in patients with hemodynamic instability and to discuss its potential role in improving prehospital and in-hospital outcome.MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis (1900–2017) using MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE, Web of Science and Central and Emcare using the keywords “aortic balloon occlusion”, “aortic balloon tamponade”, “REBOA”, and “Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion” in combination with hemorrhage control, hemorrhage, resuscitation, shock, ruptured abdominal or thoracic aorta, endovascular repair, and open repair. Original published studies on human subjects were considered.ResultsA total of 490 studies were identified; 89 met criteria for inclusion. Of the 1436 patients, overall reported mortality was 49.2% (613/1246) with significant differences (p < 0.001) between clinical indications. Hemodynamic shock was evident in 79.3%, values between clinical indications showed significant difference (p < 0.001). REBOA was favored as treatment in trauma patients in terms of mortality. Pooled analysis demonstrated an increase in mean systolic pressure by almost 50 mmHg following REBOA use.ConclusionREBOA has been used in trauma patients and ruptured aortic aneurysm patients with improvement of hemodynamic parameters and outcomes for several decades. Formal, prospective study is warranted to clarify the role of this adjunct in all hemodynamic unstable patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00068-018-0959-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

IntroductionThe Netherlands Armed Forces use -80°C frozen red blood cells (RBCs), plasma and platelets combined with regular liquid stored RBCs, for the treatment of (military) casualties in Medical Treatment Facilities abroad. Our objective was to assess and compare the use of -80°C frozen blood products in combination with the different transfusion protocols and their effect on the outcome of trauma casualties.Materials and MethodsHemovigilance and combat casualties data from Afghanistan 2006–2010 for 272 (military) trauma casualties with or without massive transfusions (MT: ≥6 RBC/24hr, N = 82 and non-MT: 1–5 RBC/24hr, N = 190) were analyzed retrospectively. In November 2007, a massive transfusion protocol (MTP; 4:3:1 RBC:Plasma:Platelets) for ATLS® class III/IV hemorrhage was introduced in military theatre. Blood product use, injury severity and mortality were assessed pre- and post-introduction of the MTP. Data were compared to civilian and military trauma studies to assess effectiveness of the frozen blood products and MTP.ResultsNo ABO incompatible blood products were transfused and only 1 mild transfusion reaction was observed with 3,060 transfused products. In hospital mortality decreased post-MTP for MT patients from 44% to 14% (P = 0.005) and for non-MT patients from 12.7% to 5.9% (P = 0.139). Average 24-hour RBC, plasma and platelet ratios were comparable and accompanying 24-hour mortality rates were low compared to studies that used similar numbers of liquid stored (and on site donated) blood products.ConclusionThis report describes for the first time that the combination of -80°C frozen platelets, plasma and red cells is safe and at least as effective as standard blood products in the treatment of (military) trauma casualties. Frozen blood can save the lives of casualties of armed conflict without the need for in-theatre blood collection. These results may also contribute to solutions for logistic problems in civilian blood supply in remote areas.

No abstract