Analysis of Traumatic Axillo-Subclavian Vessel Injuries: Endovascular Management is a Viable Option to Open Surgical Reconstruction

Contemporary Review of Traumatic Axillary and Subclavian Artery Injuries at an Urban Level One Trauma Center

OBJECTIVE

Traumatic axillary and subclavian artery injuries are uncommon. Limited data are available regarding patient and injury characteristics, as well as management strategies and outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was performed on patients presenting to University of Louisville Hospital, an urban Level One Trauma Center, with traumatic axillary and subclavian artery injuries from 2015-2021. Patients were identified using University of Louisville trauma, radiology, and billing database searches based on ICD9/10 codes for axillary and subclavian artery injuries. Descriptive statistics are expressed as frequencies and percentages. Comparisons were performed using Fisher's Exact and Chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients with traumatic axillary-subclavian arterial injuries were identified for analysis. Blunt and penetrating trauma were equally represented (n = 22 for both). A variety of injury types were seen, including minimal/intimal injury, laceration, pseudoaneurysm, transection, occlusion, and arteriovenous fistula. Management strategies were also variable, including non-operative, endovascular, planned hybrid, open, and endovascular converted to open. In operative patients, revascularization technical success was high (n = 31, 97%) with low likelihood of thrombosis (n = 2, 6%) and no infections. Among all patients, amputation rate was 5% (n = 2) and mortality rate was 9% (n = 3). Regarding arterial involvement, blunt injury was more likely to affect the subclavian (n = 18) than the axillary artery (n = 6) (P = .04). No significant difference was seen in brachial plexus injury based on artery involved (subclavian = 9 vs axillary = 11, P = .14) or mechanism (blunt = 6 vs penetrating = 11, P = .22). Non-operative management was more likely with subclavian artery injury (n = 11) vs axillary artery injury (n = 1) (P = .008). There was no significant difference between decision for non-operative (blunt = 9, penetrating = 3) vs operative (blunt = 13, penetrating = 19) management based on mechanism (P = .09). Transection injury was associated with an open repair strategy (endovascular/hybrid = 1, open/endovascular to open conversion = 11, P = .0003). Of the three patients requiring endovascular to open conversion, two required amputation, which were the only two patients in the study undergoing amputation.

CONCLUSIONS

Both open and endovascular/hybrid strategies are useful when treating traumatic axillary and subclavian artery injuries and are associated with high likelihood of revascularization technical success, with low rates of thrombosis or infection, when treated promptly at a trauma center with vascular specialists available. Transection injuries were most often treated with open revascularization. Patients undergoing amputation had blunt transection injuries to the subclavian artery and underwent endovascular to open conversion after failed attempts at endovascular revascularization.

Editor's Choice - In Hospital and Long Term Outcomes After Repair of Subclavian and Axillary Artery Injuries

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the in hospital and long term outcomes after open or endovascular repair of subclavian and axillary artery injuries.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single centre study. Data were reviewed from patients with subclavian and or axillary injuries who presented to the authors' centre between January 2009 and December 2022. Outcome data included complications, death, amputations, and re-interventions. A p value < .050 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 62 patients with subclavian or axillary trauma were admitted to the study hospital. Patients were young (median age 32.5 years, range 12 - 53) and most were men (85%); 32 patients experienced blunt trauma, and 30 penetrating trauma. The median injury severity score was 18 (interquartile range [IQR] 9, 34), and 47% of patients had a brachial plexus injury. The arterial injury was occlusion in 62% of patients, and the median ischaemia time was 12.5 hours (IQR 7.13, 24). All patients with subclavian injuries (n = 37) and 13 of 25 patients with an axillary injury underwent endovascular repair (stent graft placement). Open repair was performed in 12 patients with axillary injury (axillobrachial bypass in seven patients). At hospital discharge, the amputation free survival rate was 82% vs. 92% (p = .67), the mortality rate was 10% vs. 8% (p = 1.0), and the amputation rate was 10% vs. 0 (p = .57) for endovascular and open repair, respectively. The mean follow up time was 4.1 ± 3.5 years. After the seven year follow up, the stent primary patency was 42%. No re-interventions or amputations were performed after hospital discharge. Disability was related to fractures and soft tissue and brachial plexus injuries.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular treatment was preferred for patients with subclavian artery injuries. Open repair was preferred for patients with penetrating axillary injuries. In hospital and long term complications were related to fractures and soft tissue and brachial plexus injuries, rather than the treatment of arterial injuries. Measures are needed to reduce ischaemia time and improve brachial plexus injury repair.

Endovascular treatment of axillosubclavian arterial injuries is a safe alternative to open repair

BACKGROUND

Injuries to the axillosubclavian arteries are rare, comprising 5% of all extremity trauma. This study aims to examine contemporary outcomes of traumatic axillosubclavian injuries.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on patients admitted with innominate, subclavian, and/or axillary artery injuries to a level 1 trauma center from 2011 to 2021. Patients undergoing endovascular repair were compared to those with open repair.

RESULTS

Thirty two patients met inclusion criteria. Injuries were approached open in 22 (59%) cases and endovascular in 10 (27%). There was no difference in 30-day mortality or hospital length of stay between endovascular and open repair. Endovascular repairs had shorter operative times (1.9 vs 3.1 h, p = 0.009) and lower blood loss (72 vs 1662 mL, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair of axillosubclavian arterial injuries demonstrate similar outcomes to open repair. Significantly shorter operative times and lower blood loss suggest potential decreased morbidity.

Management of vascular trauma across Canada: A cohort study with implications for practice

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to provide a description of vascular trauma and its management at trauma centers across Canada.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study evaluated patients from 8 Canadian level 1 trauma centers (2011-2015). Medical records were queried to identify adult patients who survived to hospital with major vascular injury. Major vascular injury was defined as injury to named arterial or venous vessels in the legs, arms torso, and neck. Data collected included patient demographics, injury mechanism, injury details, management and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 1330 patients were included. Patients were 76% male with a mean age of 43 (SD 18.8). Reported injuries were 63% blunt, 36% penetrating, and the remainder mixed. The most common specific mechanisms of injury were motor vehicle collision (36%), stabbing (26%), and falls (16%), with gunshot injuries accounting for <5%. Pre-hospital tourniquets were applied in 27 patients (2%). The mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 24 (SD 14.5). We identified injuries to named vessels of the neck (32%), thorax (23%), abdomen and pelvis (27%), upper extremity (14%) and lower extremity (10%). Specific vascular injuries included transection (50%), complete occlusion (11%), partial occlusion (39%), and pseudoaneurysm formation (11%). Injuries were managed non-operatively in 32%, with definitive open surgical management (24%), endovascular management (9%) and with damage control techniques in the operating room (3%). Amputation occurred in 10% of lower extremity and 5% of upper extremity injuries. Responsibility for vascular injury management was undertaken by a wide variety of specialists (n = 17). Overall, in-hospital mortality was 13%, and 2% of patients underwent amputation.

CONCLUSION

This study describes the nature and management of vascular injuries across Canada. The variability in injury mechanisms, management strategies, specialty responsible for management, and outcomes have important implications for practice change and knowledge translation.