The respiratory insult in burns injury

Impact of inhalation injury on outcomes in critically ill burns patients: 12-year experience at a regional burns centre

INTRODUCTION

Burns inhalation injury increases the attributable mortality of burns related trauma. However, diagnostic uncertainties around bronchoscopically graded severity, and its effect on outcomes, remain. This study evaluated the impact of different bronchoscopic burns inhalation injury grades on outcomes.

METHODS

A single-centre cohort study of all patients admitted to the London Burns centre intensive care unit (BICU) over 12 years. Demographic data, burn and burns inhalation injury characteristics, and ICU-related parameters were collected retrospectively. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital and ICU lengths of stay. The impact of pneumonia was determined. Univariate and multivariable Cox's proportional hazards regression analyses informed factors predicting mortality.

RESULTS

Burns inhalation injury was diagnosed in 84 of 231 (36%) critically ill burns patients; 20 mild (grade 1), 41 severe (grades 2/3) and 23 unclassified bronchoscopically. Median (IQR) total body surface area burned (TBSA) was 20% (10-40). Mortality was significantly higher in patients with burns inhalation injury vs those without burns inhalation injury (38/84 [45%] vs 35/147 [24%], p < 0.001). Patients with pneumonia had a higher mortality than those without (34/125 [27%] vs 8/71 [11%], p = 0.009). In multivariable analysis, severe burns inhalation injury significantly increased mortality (adjusted HR=2.14, 95%CI: 1.12-4.09, p = 0.022), compared with mild injury (adjusted HR=0.58, 95% CI: 0.18-1.86, p = 0.363). Facial burns (adjusted HR=3.13, 95%CI: 1.69-5.79, p < 0.001), higher TBSA (adjusted HR=1.05, 95%CI: 1.04-1.06, p < 0.001) and older age (adjusted HR=1.04, 95%CI: 1.02-1.07, p < 0.001) also independently predicted mortality, though pneumonia did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe burns inhalation injury is a significant risk factor for mortality in critically ill burns patients. However, pneumonia did not increase mortality from burns inhalation injury. This work confirms prior implications of bronchoscopically graded burns inhalation injury. Further study is suggested, through registries, into the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of bronchoscopy in burns related lung injury.

Reducing the Indication for Ventilatory Support in the Severely Burned Patient: Results of a New Protocol Approach at a Regional Burn Center

Initial management of the severely injured routinely includes sedation and mechanical ventilatory support. However, nonjudiciously applied mechanical ventilatory support can itself lead to poorer patient outcomes. In an attempt to reduce this iatrogenic risk, a standardized, in-house, five-point protocol providing clinical guidance on the use and duration of ventilation was introduced and analyzed, and the impact on patient outcomes was assessed. In 2007, a protocol for early spontaneous breathing was introduced and established in clinical practice. This protocol included: 1) early extubation (≤6 hours after admission) in the absence of absolute ventilatory indication; 2) avoidance of "routine intubation" in spontaneously breathing patients; 3) early postoperative extubation, including patients requiring multiple surgical interventions; 4) intensive chest and respiratory physiotherapy with routine application of expectorants; and 5) early active mobilization. A retrospective clinical study compared patients (group A) over a 2-year period admitted under the new protocol with a historical patient group (group B). Patients in group A (n = 38) had fewer ventilator days over the time-course of treatment (3 [1; 5.8] vs 18.5 days [0.5; 20.5]; P = .0001) with a lower rate of tracheostomies (15.8 vs 54%; P = .0003). Patients on ventilation at admission in group A had shorter ventilation periods after admission (4.75 [4; 22.25] vs 378 hours [8.5; 681.5]; P = .0003), and 66.7% of these patients were extubated within 6 hours of admission (vs 9.1% in group B). No patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria required re- or emergency intubation. In the first 5 days of treatment, significantly lower Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were recorded in group A. There was also a trend for lower mortality rates (0 [0%] vs 6 [14%]), sepsis rates (24 [63.2%] vs 37 [88.1%]), and cumulative fluid balance on days 3 and 7 in group A. In contrast, group A demonstrated an elevated rate of pneumonia (15 [39.5%] vs 8 [19%]). These trends, however, lacked statistical significance. Our five-point protocol was safe and easily translated into clinical practice. In the authors experience, this protocol significantly reduced the ventilatory period in severely injured. Furthermore, this study suggests that many injured may be over-treated with routine ventilation, which carries accompanying risks.