Validation of nonoperative management of occult vascular injuries and accuracy of physical examination alone in penetrating extremity trauma: 5- to 10-year follow-up

Cost-effectiveness analysis of routine computed tomography angiography (CTA) for lower extremity penetrating trauma

BACKGROUND

Routine evaluation with CTA for patients with isolated lower extremity penetrating trauma and normal ankle-brachial-indices (ABI) remains controversial. While prior literature has found normal ABI's (≥0.9) and a normal clinical examination to be adequate for safe discharge, there remains concern for missed injuries which could lead to delayed surgical intervention and unnecessary morbidity. Our hypothesis was that routine CTA after isolated lower extremity penetrating trauma with normal ABIs and clinical examination is not cost-effective.

METHODS

We performed a decision-analytic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of obtaining a CTA routinely compared to clinical observation and ABI evaluation in hemodynamically normal patients with isolated penetrating lower extremity trauma. Our base case was a patient that sustained penetrating lower extremity trauma with normal ABIs that received a CTA in the trauma bay. Costs, probability, and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) were generated from published literature.

RESULTS

Clinical evaluation only (no CTA) was cost-effective with a cost of $2056.13 and 0.98 QALYs gained compared to routine CTA which had increased costs of $7449.91 and lower QALYs 0.92. Using one-way sensitivity analysis, routine CTA does not become the cost-effective strategy until the cost of a missed injury reaches $210,075.83.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with isolated, penetrating lower extremity trauma with normal ABIs and clinical examination do not warrant routine CTA as there is no benefit with increased costs.

Penetrating Vascular Injuries of the Lower Limbs after Stab Wounds: Predictive Factors of Limb Loss and Mortality

BACKGROUND

Penetrating vascular injuries (PVIs) of the lower limbs due to stab wounds are associated with high mortality and limb loss rates. We analyzed the outcomes of a series of patients who underwent surgical treatment of these lesions, assessing the presence of any factor associated with limb loss and mortality; (2) Methods: Data of patients admitted from 01/2008 to 12/2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes were the limb loss and the mortality rate at 30 days postoperatively. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed as appropriate. p values < 0.05 were considered significant; (3) Results: Data of 67 male patients were analyzed. Two died (3%) and three (4.5%) had a lower limb amputation after failed revascularization. In the univariate analysis, the clinical presentation significantly affected the risk of postoperative mortality and limb loss. The location of the lesion at the superficial femoral artery (OR 4.32, p = 0.001) or at the popliteal artery (OR 4.89, p = 0.0015) also increased the risk. In the multivariate analysis, the need for a vein graft bypass was the only significant predictor of limb loss and mortality (OR 4.58, p < 0.0001); (4) Conclusions: PVIs of lower limbs due to stab wounds were lethal in 3% of cases and lead to a secondary major amputation in 4.5% more cases. The need for a vein bypass grafting was the strongest predictor of postoperative limb loss and mortality.

Isolated Ulnar Artery Injury: Indications for and Timing of Operative Intervention

Background. Penetrating ulnar artery injury at the wrist is typically treated with immediate operative repair. This study reports a missed iatrogenic ulnar artery injury that resulted in the development of an ulnar artery pseudoaneurysm that was later managed with elective operative repair. The diagnosis and treatment of distal upper extremity pseudoaneurysms and the approach to suspected ulnar artery injury are discussed. Suspected isolated ulnar artery injuries without hard signs of bleeding can be managed with close follow-up and elective repair, should complications such as pseudoaneurysm occur.

Assessment and Interventions for Vascular Injuries Associated With Fractures

Vascular injuries associated with fractures are limb-threatening injuries with notable morbidity. The prompt and thorough evaluation of these patients is imperative to diagnose vascular injuries, and coordinated multidisciplinary care is needed to provide optimal outcomes. The initial assessment includes a detailed physical examination assessing for hard and soft signs of arterial injury, and the arterial pressure index can be used to reliably identify vascular compromise and the need for additional assessment or intervention. Advanced imaging in the form of CT angiography is highly sensitive in additional characterization of the potential injury and can be obtained in an expedient manner. The optimal treatment of fractures with vascular injuries includes providing skeletal stability and confirming or reestablishing adequate distal perfusion as soon as possible. Options for vascular intervention include observation, ligation, direct arterial repair, vascular bypass grafting, endovascular intervention, and staged temporary shunting, followed by bypass grafting. Although the optimal sequence of surgical intervention remains an incompletely answered question, the orthopaedic role in the care of patients with these injuries is to provide mechanical stability to the injured limb to protect the vascular repair and surrounding soft-tissue envelope.

In-hospital outcomes in autogenous vein versus synthetic graft interposition for traumatic arterial injury: A propensity-matched cohort from PROOVIT

BACKGROUND

The ideal conduit for traumatic arterial repair is controversial. Autologous vein was compared with synthetic interposition grafts in the acute setting. The primary outcome was in-hospital reoperation or endovascular intervention.

METHODS

The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment registry from November 2013 to January 2019 was queried for arterial injuries requiring interposition vein or graft repair. Patients with no recorded Injury Severity Score were excluded, and multiple imputation was used for other missing data. Patients treated with synthetic grafts (SGs) were propensity matched to patients with vein grafts (VGs) to account for preoperative differences.

RESULTS

Four hundred sixty from 19 institutions were identified, with 402 undergoing VG and 58 SG. In the SG group, 45 were PTFE grafts, 5 were Dacron, and 8 had other conduits. The SG group was more severely injured at admission with more gunshot wounds and higher mean Injury Severity Score, lactate, and first-24-hour transfusion requirement. In addition, the SG cohort had significantly lower admission systolic blood pressure, pH, and hemoglobin. After propensity matching, 51 patients with SG were matched with 87 patients with VG. There were no differences in demographics, clinical parameters, or diagnostic evaluation techniques postmatch. The need for reoperation or endovascular intervention between the matched groups was equivalent (18%; p = 0.8). There was no difference in any secondary outcome including thrombosis, stenosis, pseudoaneurysm, infection, or embolic event, and hospital and intensive care unit length of stay were the same.

CONCLUSION

American Association for the Surgery of Trauma PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment registry data demonstrate that SGs are used in more critically ill patients. After controlling for relevant clinical factors and propensity matching, there is no in-hospital difference in rate of reoperation or endovascular intervention, or any secondary outcome between VG and SG.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiolgic, Level III.

Utility of computed tomography angiography in traumatic lower limb injury: Review of clinical impact in level 1 trauma centre

INTRODUCTION

CT angiography (CTA) is efficient and accurate in detecting lower limb vascular injury in the setting of trauma (1-6). Less clear is the in-practice correlation between appropriate indications for these examinations and subsequent clinical impacts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All CT leg angiography acquired from January 2016 through April 2019 were reviewed via retrospective search. Studies not acquired for trauma were excluded. Imaging and reports were reviewed to assess for vascular injury. Electronic medical records were reviewed to assess the presence or absence of classical 'hard' or 'soft' signs of vascular injury and whether vascular intervention was undertaken.

RESULTS

A total of 347 lower limb injuries were identified in 273 men and 74 women. Mean age was 41.5 years ranging from 15-95 years. 268 cases were fractures with 177 open injuries. 301 of injuries were secondary to blunt trauma, 31 penetrating injury occurred and 15 cases were ascribed to blast/gunshot injury. 74 (21.3%) studies were deemed to have a positive finding of vascular injury, 249 (71.8%) were reported as negative and 24 (6.9%) were indeterminate. Of the cases with positive findings, 26 underwent intervention (7.4% of all patients undergoing CTA). No patients with negative CTA required intervention, while three (3, 0.8% of total) with indeterminate findings required intervention. Where there were no clinical signs (absence of any hard or soft signs) 249 CTA's were performed and none required any form of intervention.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of clinical signs of vessel injury, CT angiography is unlikely to demonstrate vascular injury requiring intervention in the setting of lower limb trauma.

[Interventional management of peripheral vascular injuries : From the exclusion indication to the procedure of first choice]

BACKGROUND

Approximately one third of all traumatic peripheral artery injuries affect the upper extremities, while two thirds involve the arteries of the lower extremities. Historically, these injuries were treated by open surgical repair. Nowadays, interventional treatment, such as embolization or stent grafting are increasingly used to treat peripheral artery injuries.

OBJECTIVE

Determination of the current state of interventional treatment options for injuries of peripheral arteries.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Selective literature review on the current state of interventional management of peripheral artery injuries.

RESULTS

Although scarce, the available data confirm the efficacy of interventional techniques for managing peripheral artery injuries; however, despite improvements in treatment techniques and interventional devices, not all patients are equally well suited for endovascular or open surgical treatment. Consequently, a multidisciplinary decision on the best treatment has to be made on a case by case basis.

CONCLUSION

According to the promising clinical data, interventional treatment should be considered more often. Diagnostic algorithms need to be adapted accordingly.

American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-World Society of Emergency Surgery guidelines on diagnosis and management of peripheral vascular injuries

The peripheral arteries and veins of the extremities are among the most commonly injured vessels in both civilian and military vascular trauma. Blunt causes are more frequent than penetrating except during military conflicts and in certain geographic areas. Physical examination and simple bedside investigations of pulse pressures are key in early identification of these injuries. In stable patients with equivocal physical examinations, computed tomography angiograms have become the mainstay of screening and diagnosis. Immediate open surgical repair remains the first-line therapy in most patients. However, advances in endovascular therapies and more widespread availability of this technology have resulted in an increase in the range of injuries and frequency of utilization of minimally invasive treatments for vascular injuries in stable patients. Prevention of and early detection and treatment of compartment syndrome remain essential in the recovery of patients with significant peripheral vascular injuries. The decision to perform amputation in patients with mangled extremities remains difficult with few clear indicators. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma in conjunction with the World Society of Emergency Surgery seeks to summarize the literature to date and provide guidelines on the presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of peripheral vascular injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review study, level IV.

Yield of CT angiography in penetrating lower extremity trauma

PURPOSE

CT angiography (CTA) has become a valuable tool in the assessment of suspected arterial injury in patients with penetrating lower extremity trauma. However, expensive imaging such as CTA should be judiciously utilized to ensure value-based care. We therefore assessed the yield of CTA in this setting at a level-1 trauma unit and correlated it with the clinical history provided.

METHODS

A retrospective descriptive study from 1 July 2013 to 31 June 2018 at a 1386-bed, tertiary-level, public-sector teaching hospital in Cape Town, South Africa.. All patients undergoing CTA for suspected arterial injury following penetrating lower extremity trauma were included. The imaging yield of clinically significant arterial injury and the predictive value of specific clinical signs were determined.

RESULTS

A total of 983 patients (median age 27 years, 91% male) were included; 90% (886/983) had gunshots, 9% (89/983) stabs, and 1% (8/983) other injuries. Despite an average 13% year-on-year increase in CTA performed, there was no change in the proportion demonstrating arterial injury. Thirty-four percent (23/68) of patients with strong (hard) signs of arterial injury (active pulsatile bleeding, rapidly expanding hematoma, absent pulse, palpable thrill, or audible bruit), 11% (49/459) with moderate (soft) signs (history of an arterial bleed, excessive non-pulsatile bleeding, large non-expanding hematoma, major neurological deficit, diminished but appreciable pulse, and arterial proximity), and 5% (24/456) with no indication for imaging had clinically significant arterial injuries. Significant positive correlations were rapidly expanding hematoma (p = 0.009), an absent pulse (p < 0.001), and a diminished pulse (p < 0.001). Significant negative correlations were proximity to a major artery (p = 0.005) and no clinical indication provided (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There is poor correlation between clinical details provided and the presence of arterial injury at our institution. In this context, CTA serves a pivotal role in the definitive identification of arterial injury.

Hard signs gone soft: A critical evaluation of presenting signs of extremity vascular injury

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in management of extremity vascular injuries, "hard signs" remain the primary criterion to determine need for imaging and urgency of exploration. We propose that hard signs are outdated and that hemorrhagic and ischemic signs of vascular injury may be of greater clinical utility.

METHODS

Extremity arterial injuries from the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma PROspective Observational Vascular Injury Treatment registry were analyzed to examine the relationships between hard signs, ischemic signs, and hemorrhagic signs of extremity vascular injury with workup, diagnosis, and management.

RESULTS

Of 1,910 cases, 1,108 (58%) had hard signs of vascular injury. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) was more commonly used as the diagnostic modality in patients without hard signs, while operative exploration was primarily used for diagnosis in hard signs. Patients undergoing CTA were more likely to undergo endovascular or hybrid repair (EHR) (10.7%) compared with patients who underwent exploration for diagnosis (1.5%). Of 915 patients presenting with hemorrhagic signs, CTA was performed 14.5% of the time and was associated with a higher rate of EHR and observation. Of the 490 patients presenting with ischemic signs, CTA was performed 31.6% of the time and was associated with higher rates of EHR and observation. Hemorrhagic signs were associated with arterial transection, while ischemic signs were associated with arterial occlusion. Patients with ischemic signs undergoing exploration for diagnosis received more units of packed red blood cells during the first 24 hours. There was no difference in amputation rate, reintervention rate, hospital length of stay, or mortality in comparing groups who underwent CTA versus exploration.

CONCLUSION

Hard signs have limitations in identification and characterization of extremity arterial injuries. A strategy of using hemorrhagic and ischemic signs of vascular injury is of greater clinical utility. Further prospective study is needed to validate this proposed redefinition of categorization of presentations of extremity arterial injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic, level III.

Penetrating Extremity Trauma Endovascular versus Open Repair?

Penetrating extremity trauma (PET) accounts for an estimated 5-15% of trauma with vascular injury and these injuries are accountable for a significant percentage of trauma-related deaths. Historically, vascular injuries were best treated by open repair. While a defined selection criteria and a comprehensive algorithm have not been validated, the advancement of endovascular techniques, embolotherapy, and stent grafting have become viable options for the treatment of penetrating arterial extremity trauma in select patients. Advantages endovascular repair offers include decreasing mortality and morbidity associated with open repair, decreasing blood loss, decreasing iatrogenic injury such as nerve injury, and lower rate of wound infection. Patients stability, type of vascular injury, and lesion location are main factors help deciding between endovascular and open repair. Patient selection between endovascular and open repair should be determined by on a case-by-case situation, individual hospital guidelines, a multidisciplinary approach, and technical expertise.

Literature review of peripheral vascular trauma: Is the era of intervention coming?

Traumatic peripheral vascular injury is a significant cause of disability and death either in civilian environments or on the battlefield. Penetrating trauma and blunt trauma are the most common forms of vascular injuries. Besides, iatrogenic arterial injury (IAI) is another pattern of vascular trauma. The management of peripheral vascular injuries has been improved in different environments and wars. There are different types of vascular injuries, such as vasospasm, contusion, intimal flaps, intimal disruption or hematoma, external compression, laceration, transection and focal wall defects, etc. The main clinical manifestations of vascular injuries are shock following massive hemorrhage and limb necrosis due to tissue and organ ischemia. Ultrasound, computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) are most valuable for assessment of peripheral vascular injuries. Angiography remains the gold standard for diagnosing vascular trauma. Immediate hemorrhage control and rapid restoration of blood flow are the primary goals of vascular trauma treatment. There are many operative treatment methods for vascular injuries, such as vascular suture or ligation, vascular wall repair and vascular reconstruction with blood vessel prostheses or vascular grafts. Embolization, balloon dilation and covered stent implantation are the main endovascular techniques. Surgical operation is still the primary treatment for vascular injuries. Endovascular treatment is a promising alternative, proved to be safe and effective, and preferred selection for patients. In summary, rapid diagnosis and timely surgical intervention remain the mainstays of the treatment. However, many issues need to be resolved by further studies.

Arteriography in the Delayed Evaluation of Wartime Extremity Injuries

Recent combat casualties have stimulated a reassessment of the principles of management of high-risk extremity injuries with a normal vascular examination. Rapid evacuations have presented numerous U.S. soldiers to our service for evaluation in the early postinjury period. The objective of this single-institution report is to analyze the application of liberal arteriography in the delayed evaluation of modern wartime extremity injuries. Data from consecutive wartime evacuees evaluated for extremity injuries between March 2002 and November 2004 were prospectively entered into a database and retrospectively reviewed. Analysis was focused on arteriography and its role in our current diagnostic and therapeutic approach. Information including injury sites and mechanisms, associated trauma, battlefield repairs performed, arteriography technique, complications, findings, and need for further intervention were reviewed. Indications for imaging in this high-risk group included proximity to vascular structures, abnormal or equivocal physical examination, adjunctive operative planning, and evaluation of battlefield repair. Ninety-nine of 179 patients (55%) with extremity injuries underwent arteriography, with 142 total limbs studied. The majority of them were wounded by explosive devices (82%) or high-velocity rifle munitions (14%). Abnormalities were found in 75 of 142 (52.8%) imaged limbs in 46 of the 99 (46.5%) patients. Twenty-four of these patients (52.2%) required additional operative intervention. Occult vascular injury findings were associated with bony fracture in 68% and nerve injury in 16%. Median delay between injury and stateside evaluation was 6 days. Two thirds of these soldiers presented with a normal physical examination result. There were no access site complications or incidents of contrast-induced acute renal failure. The liberal application of arteriography is a low-risk method to provide high-yield data in the delayed vascular evaluation of extremities injured from modern military munitions. Physical examination findings remain the most useful indicator, but a normal examination can be misleading and should not guide the decision for invasive imaging. Lesions are found and require further intervention at a higher rate than expected from the typical civilian trauma experience.

Diagnosis and treatment of traumatic vascular injury of limbs in military and emergency medicine: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Traumatic vascular injury is caused by explosions and projectiles (bullets and shrapnel); it may affect the arteries and veins of the limbs, and is common in wartime, triggering bleeding, and ischemia. The increasing use of high-energy weapons in modern warfare is associated with severe vascular injuries.

METHODS

To summarize the current evidence of diagnosis and treatment for traumatic vascular injury of limbs, for saving limbs and lives, and put forward some new insights, we comprehensively consulted literatures and analyzed progress in injury diagnosis and wound treatment, summarized the advanced treatments now available, especially in wartime, and explored the principal factors in play in an effort to optimize clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Extremity vascular trauma poses several difficult dilemmas in diagnosis and treatment. The increasing use of high-energy weapons in modern warfare is associated with severe vascular injuries. Any delay in treatment may lead to loss of limbs or death. The development of diagnose and treat vascular injury of extremities are the clinical significance to the tip of military medicine, such as the use of fast, cheap, low invasive diagnostic methods, repairing severe vascular injury as soon as possible, using related technologies actively (fasciotomy, etc).

CONCLUSION

We point out the frontier of the diagnosis and treatment of traumatic vascular injury, also with a new model of wartime injury treatment in American (forward surgical teams and combat support hospitals), French military surgeons regarding management of war-related vascular wounds and Chinese military ("3 districts and 7 grades" model). Many issues remain to be resolved by further experience and investigation.

Selective non-operative management for penetrating extremity trauma: A paradigm shift in management?

BACKGROUND

Selective non-operative management (SNOM) has been proposed as a safe and adequate strategy for penetrating extremity trauma (PET) management. This may reduce unwarranted surgical exploration and enhance cost-effectiveness. Our experience at a UK major trauma centre advocates SNOM-PET as a viable and safe strategy for selected patients. A PET management algorithm is proposed.

METHODS

A retrospective review was undertaken for isolated PET from October 2015 to October 2016. Examination findings were recorded as positive if neurovascular or tendon deficits were elicited. Surgical exploration was recorded as positive if neurovascular or tendon injuries were found. Diagnostic statistics were employed for upper limb (UL) and lower limb (LL) examinations.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty patients [112 UL and 48 LL PET injuries] were included. Fifty-six out of 112 (50%) patients with UL PET had no examination findings. Twenty-three out of 56 (41%) patients had negative surgical explorations and 33 of 56 (59%) patients had positive surgical explorations. Thirty-four out of 48 patients with LL PET had no examination findings. All 34 patients had negative surgical explorations. The sensitivity (0.61 vs 1.00, p = 0.005), specificity (0.82 vs 0.97, p = 0.043) and negative predictive value (NPV; 0.41 vs 1.00, p < 0.001) were lower for UL PET than for LL PET examinations. There were no statistically significant differences in sensitivity, specificity as well as NPV and positive predictive value between plastic surgery residents and emergency medicine residents for UL and LL examinations.

CONCLUSION

This is the first UK evaluation of SNOM-PET. It may be safely utilised for LL PET. UL PET should be surgically explored. SNOM-PET may avoid unwarranted surgical exploration, associated complications and cost.

Evaluation of Experience with Lower Extremity Arterial Injuries at an Urban Trauma Center

Lower extremity arterial injuries (LEAIs) can be complicated injuries resulting in limb loss and death. Patients with LEAI often have multiple injuries increasing the risk for morbidity and mortality. We sought to evaluate the incidence and management of LEAI and to define associations between injuries and outcomes. We performed a retrospective review of LEAI at an urban level-1 trauma center from April 2005 to April 2015. Chi-square tests were used to compare independent groups with respect to mortality and amputation. Means were compared between independent groups using two-sample t -tests. From April 2005 to April 2015, 208 arterial injuries occurred in 163 patients. The majority (80.4%) suffered concomitant lower extremity injuries with 35.6% suffering systemic injuries. Surgical intervention was required for 72.1% of injuries. Amputation rate was 14.7%. Mortality rate was 8.0%. Data from 2010 to 2015 were more specifically analyzed. Injury severity score (ISS) was higher with fatalities (37 ± 13.16 vs. 11.8 ± 8.51, p  < 0.0001) and in patients requiring an amputation (25.4 ± 15.32 compared with 11.6 ± 9.05, p  = 0.0015). Popliteal artery injury was most likely to require an amputation (odds ratio [OR] = 2.9, p  = 0.04). Mortality was more likely when systemic injuries were present (OR = 18.1, p  = 0.0005). The majority of patients with arterial injuries require surgical management, most often with open surgical techniques. Arterial injuries associated with systemic injuries, blunt injury mechanisms, and higher ISS are at a significantly increased risk of mortality.

For the patient-Evolution in the management of vascular trauma

There has been an evolution in the diagnosis and management of vascular trauma over the past 100 years. The primary stimulus to these changes has been the increased volume of patients with cervical, truncal, and peripheral vascular injuries during military conflicts and in civilian life. Patients with "hard" signs of a vascular injury are taken to surgery emergently with a few exceptions to be described. In contrast, patients with "soft" signs of a vascular injury undergo a careful physical examination including measurement of vascular index to determine if radiologic imaging is necessary. Computed tomography arteriography has become the most commonly used method of imaging, whereas duplex ultrasonography is used in some centers. Nonoperative management is now common for nonocclusive injuries diagnosed on computed tomography arteriography. Proximal tourniquets are commonly used to control exsanguinating hemorrhage from injuries to extremities, whereas balloons can be used to control hemorrhage from difficult to expose areas at operation. Temporary intraluminal shunts are now used in 3% to 9% of arterial injuries. Operative techniques of repair have been refined and contribute to the excellent results noted in modern trauma centers.

Reassessing the utility of CT angiograms in penetrating injuries to the extremities

BACKGROUND

Computed tomography angiography has become routine in the management of penetrating trauma to the extremity. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy of physical examination findings compared with computed tomography angiography for detection of clinically significant vascular injuries associated with penetrating trauma to the extremity.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review of patients presenting to a single level 1 trauma center from January 2013-June 2016. Patients with penetrating trauma to the extremity and no hard signs of vascular injury were included. Physical examination and computed tomography angiography findings were analyzed, with particular focus given to missed injuries.

RESULTS

We identified 393 patients with penetrating trauma to the extremity without hard signs of vascular injury. Computed tomography angiography was performed in 114 patients (29%). Four patients with distal pulses documented on their initial trauma surveys were found to have vascular injuries on computed tomography angiography, although 3 of these injuries were identified on repeat physical examination. One additional patient had a delayed presentation of a pseudoaneurysm. No mortality or limb loss resulted from these injuries. Total hospital charges for computed tomography angiography amounted to over $700,000.

CONCLUSION

Patients with penetrating trauma to the extremity and no hard signs of vascular injury do not require computed tomography angiography for identification of clinically relevant vascular injuries that require emergent operative repair. Serial physical examination appears to provide accurate detection of vascular injury requiring procedural intervention.

Pitfalls in the management of peripheral vascular injuries

Over the past 65+ years, most civilian peripheral vascular injuries have been managed by trauma surgeons with training or experience in vascular repair or ligation. This is appropriate as the in-hospital trauma team is immediately available, and there are often other injuries present in the victim.

The pitfall to avoid during evaluation of the patient in the emergency center is a missed diagnosis. In the patient without ‘hard’ signs of a peripheral vascular injury, a careful history (bleeding), physical examination including measurement of ankle–brachial (ABI) or brachial–brachial index and liberal use of CT arteriography depending on an ABI <0.9 should essentially make the diagnosis if an arterial injury is present.

At operation, one pitfall is to limit skin preparation and draping, thereby eliminating the option of removing the greater saphenous vein if needed as a conduit from either the groin or ankle of an uninjured lower extremity. Another pitfall is to make a full longitudinal incision directly over a large pulsatile hematoma. Rather, separate shorter longitudinal incisions should be made to obtain proximal and distal vascular control before entering the hematoma. The failure to recognize patients who should be managed initially with insertion of a temporary intraluminal shunt is a major pitfall as well. Not following time-proven and results-proven ‘fine techniques’ of operative repair is another major pitfall. Such techniques include the following: use of small angioaccess vascular clamps or silastic vessel loops; passage of proximal and distal Fogarty catheters; administration of regional or systemic heparin during complex repairs; an open anastomosis technique; and completion arteriography after a complex arterial repair in a lower extremity.

Avoiding pitfalls should allow for success in peripheral vascular repair, particularly since most patients are young with non-diseased vessels.

Accuracy of Physical Examination, Ankle-Brachial Index, and Ultrasonography in the Diagnosis of Arterial Injury in Patients With Penetrating Extremity Trauma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Penetrating Extremity Trauma (PET) may result in arterial injury, a rare but limb- and life-threatening surgical emergency. Timely, accurate diagnosis is essential for potential intervention in order to prevent significant morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

Using a systematic review/meta-analytic approach, we determined the utility of physical examination, Ankle-Brachial Index (ABI), and Ultrasonography (US) in the diagnosis of arterial injury in emergency department (ED) patients who have sustained PET. We applied a test-treatment threshold model to determine which evaluations may obviate CT Angiography (CTA).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from inception to November 2016 for studies of ED patients with PET. We included studies on adult and pediatric subjects. We defined the reference standard to include CTA, catheter angiography, or surgical exploration. When low-risk patients did not undergo the reference standard, trials must have specified that patients were observed for at least 24 hours. We used the Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) to evaluate bias and applicability of the included studies. We calculated positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-) of physical examination ("hard signs" of vascular injury), US, and ABI. Using established CTA test characteristics (sensitivity = 96.2%, specificity = 99.2%) and applying the Pauker-Kassirer method, we developed a test-treatment threshold model (testing threshold = 0.14%, treatment threshold = 72.9%).

RESULTS

We included eight studies (n = 2,161, arterial injury prevalence = 15.5%). Studies had variable quality with most at high risk for partial and double verification bias. Some studies investigated multiple index tests: physical examination (hard signs) in three studies (n = 1,170), ABI in five studies (n = 1,040), and US in four studies (n = 173). Due to high heterogeneity (I²  > 75%) of the results, we could not calculate LR+ or LR- for hard signs or LR+ for ABI. The weighted prevalence of arterial injury for ABI was 14.3% and LR- was 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.48-0.71) resulting in a posttest probability of 9% for arterial injury. Ultrasonography had weighted prevalence of 18.9%, LR+ of 35.4 (95% CI = 8.3-151), and LR- of 0.24 (95% CI = 0.08-0.72); posttest probabilities for arterial injury were 89% and 5% after positive or negative US, respectively. The posttest probability of arterial injury with positive US (89%) exceeded the CTA treatment threshold (72.9%). The posttest probabilities of arterial injury with negative US (5%) and normal ABI (9%) exceeded the CTA testing threshold (0.14%). Normal examination (no hard or soft signs) with normal ABI in combination had LR- of 0.01 (95% CI = 0.0-0.10) resulting in an arterial injury posttest probability of 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

In PET patients, positive US may obviate CTA. In patients with a normal examination (no hard or soft signs) and a normal ABI, arterial injury can be ruled out. However, a normal ABI or negative US cannot independently exclude arterial injury. Due to high study heterogeneity, we cannot make recommendations when hard signs are present or absent or when ABI is abnormal. In these situations, one should use clinical judgment to determine the need for further observation, CTA or catheter angiography, or surgical exploration.

Vascular trauma

Last century saw a marked increase in vascular injuries and their treatment has been improved from the experience gained in the major conflicts in the latter half of the last century. This trend of increasing numbers of vascular injuries has been perpetuated by a rise in civilian violence.

This article reviews the mechanisms, diagnosis and treatment of vascular injury and outlines some of the advances in endovascular techniques for treating vascular trauma.

Vascular Injury in Orthopedic Trauma

Vascular injury in orthopedic trauma is challenging. The risk to life and limb can be high, and clinical signs initially can be subtle. Recognition and management should be a critical skill for every orthopedic surgeon. There are 5 types of vascular injury: intimal injury (flaps, disruptions, or subintimal/intramural hematomas), complete wall defects with pseudoaneurysms or hemorrhage, complete transections with hemorrhage or occlusion, arteriovenous fistulas, and spasm. Intimal defects and subintimal hematomas with possible secondary occlusion are most commonly associated with blunt trauma, whereas wall defects, complete transections, and arteriovenous fistulas usually occur with penetrating trauma. Spasm can occur after either blunt or penetrating trauma to an extremity and is more common in young patients. Clinical presentation of vascular injury may not be straightforward. Physical examination can be misleading or initially unimpressive; a normal pulse examination may be present in 5% to 15% of patients with vascular injury. Detection and treatment of vascular injuries should take place within the context of the overall resuscitation of the patient according to the established principles of the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) protocols. Advances in the field, made mostly during times of war, have made limb salvage the rule rather than the exception. Teamwork, familiarity with the often subtle signs of vascular injuries, a high index of suspicion, effective communication, appropriate use of imaging modalities, sound knowledge of relevant technique, and sequence of surgical repairs are among the essential factors that will lead to a successful outcome. This article provides a comprehensive literature review on a subject that generates significant controversy and confusion among clinicians involved in the care of trauma patients. [Orthopedics. 2016; 39(4):249-259.].

The early management of gunshot wounds Part II: the abdomen, extremities and special situations

The management of gunshot wounds of the abdomen and extremities is evolving with centres who treat large volumes of such injuries tending to the application of a policy of selective non-operative management. This article discusses the management of gunshot wounds to the abdomen and extremities and reviews the evidence supporting these changing practices. Special situations such as wounding by shotguns or air rifles are also examined as are the special considerations needed when dealing with the gunshot injured pregnant women or in a child.

Location of civilian ballistic femoral fracture indicates likelihood of arterial injury

BACKGROUND

We evaluated whether the location of a ballistic femoral fracture helps predict the presence of arterial injury. We hypothesized that fractures located in the distal third of the femur are associated with a higher rate of arterial injury.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of electronic medical records at our level I trauma centre and found 133 consecutive patients with femoral fractures from civilian gunshots from 2002 to 2007, 14 of whom sustained arterial injury. Fracture extent was measured with computerized viewing software and recorded with a standard technique, calculating proximal, distal, and central locations of the fracture as a function of overall length of the bone. Analyses were conducted with Student's t, Chi-squared, and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

The location of any fracture line in the distal third of the femur was associated with increased risk of arterial injury (P<0.05). The odds ratio for the presence of arterial injury when the proximal fracture line was in the distal third of the femur was 5.63 (95% confidence interval, 1.7-18.6; P<0.05) and when the distal fracture line was in the distal third of the femur was 6.72 (95% confidence interval, 1.78-25.44; P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A fracture line in the distal third of the femur after ballistic injury is six times more likely to be associated with arterial injury and warrants careful evaluation. Our data show that fracture location can help alert clinicians to possible arterial injury after ballistic femoral fracture.

Practical application of bedside diagnostics in determining limb viability

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to determine the practical application of vascular lab studies in determining limb salvage outcomes in injured patients with concerning clinical examinations.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the trauma registry at a level I center was conducted from January 2009 to June 2013. All patients >16 years of age who sustained a lower limb arterial injury had a concerning clinical exam (mottled skin, decreased skin warmth, diminished pulses) and had vascular lab studies to determine management were included. Data-points included demographics, type and location of injury, procedure type, vascular lab study results, and limb outcome.

RESULTS

Over a five-year period, 11 trauma patients met inclusion criteria. Five of these patients had concerning clinical exams after revascularization, and six observed patients had a concerning clinical examination during the course of their hospitalization. All 11 patients had vascular lab studies that were within normal limits. As a result of normal vascular lab studies, none of these patients underwent further imaging or intervention. None of these patients underwent amputation.

CONCLUSION

Vascular lab studies may be utilized to determine the need for intervention and/or lower limb bypass sufficiency in patients with questionable clinical examinations post injury.

Endovascular Therapy And Controversies In The Management Of Vascular Trauma

Aim:

To review the advent of endovascular treatment of vascular injuries and its controversies.

Methods:

Literature review over the past 13 years using the PubMed search engine.

Results:

The management of vascular trauma has changed dramatically over the last decade. This is mainly due to the advent of advanced endovascular techniques and technologies. There are, however, a limited number of publications with a correspondingly small number of patients and lack of long-term follow-up. In this article, we discuss the injuries to different vessel groups and their respective endovascular approaches. Of the literature available, the endovascular management of aortic injuries still holds the most experience and has shown favorable results.

Conclusion:

Endovascular management of vascular injuries is a new addition to the armamentarium of the surgeon. The fact that it is minimally invasive is a major advantage and the published data are encouraging. However, in order to determine which anatomical sites and circumstances are most appropriate for this method versus open surgery, more reports are necessary.

The incidence of acute venous injury as a result of proximity penetrating trauma screened with colour flow duplex ultrasound

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of acute deep venous thrombosis as a result of penetrating proximity extremity trauma (PPET) to the thigh has been demonstrated to be 16% in a single report. The purpose of the current study is to demonstrate the incidence and clinical significance of venous injury as a result of proximity trauma to the thigh in a large cohort screened with colour flow duplex (CFD) ultrasound and to identify factors predictive of defining a wound in proximity to a major vascular structure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted from January 1st, 2010 to January 1st, 2012 on all patients presenting with penetrating extremity trauma. Data on injury location, mechanism, associated extremity and non-extremity injuries, use and results of CFD, as well as the admitting trauma surgeon were recorded and analysed.

RESULTS

220 thigh wounds with a normal physical examination were identified, of which 167 (75.9%) underwent CFD due to proximity. The incidence of acute venous injury was 4.8% (8/167). 37.5% (3/8) of these injuries resulted in morbidity. Injury mechanism and which attending physician was on call were predictive of a wound being defined as in proximity, whereas an injury with an associated fracture was a negative predictor.

CONCLUSIONS

Occult venous injuries as a result of PPET occur in 4.8% of patients with thigh wounds in proximity to a major vascular structure. The designation of a wound as being in "proximity" was influenced by injury mechanism, associated fractures, and the judgement of the on-call attending. Colour flow duplex is a valuable tool with the ability to identify not only occult arterial injuries, but also venous injuries with the potential to cause significant morbidity as well.

Treatment of penetrating trauma of the extremities: ten years' experience at a Dutch level 1 trauma center

Background

A selective non-operative management (SNOM) has found to be an adequate and safe strategy to assess and treat patients suffering from penetrating trauma of the extremities (PTE). With this SNOM comes a strategy in which adjuvant investigations or interventions are not routinely performed, but based on physical examination only.

Methods

All subsequent patients presented with PTE at a Dutch level I trauma center from October 2000 to June 2011 were included in this study. In-hospital and long-term outcome was analysed in the light of assessment of these patients according to the SNOM protocol.

Results

A total of 668 patients (88.2% male; 33.8% gunshot wounds) with PTE presented at the Emergency Department of a level 1 traumacenter, of whom 156 were admitted for surgical treatment or observation. Overall, 22 (14%) patients that were admitted underwent exploration of the extremity for vascular injury. After conservative observation, two (1.5%) patients needed an intervention to treat (late onset) vascular complications. Other long-term extremity related complications were loss of function or other deformity (n = 9) due to missed nerve injury, including 2 patients with peroneal nerve injury caused by delayed compartment syndrome treatment.

Conclusion

A SNOM protocol for initial assessment and treatment of PTE is feasible and safe. Clinical examination of the injured extremity is a reliable diagnostic 'tool' for excluding vascular injury. Repeated assessments for nerve injuries are important as these are the ones that are frequently missed and result in long-term disability. Level of evidence: II / III, retrospective prognostic observational cohort study Key words Penetrating trauma, extremity, vascular injury, complications.

Evaluation and management of penetrating lower extremity arterial trauma: an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline

BACKGROUND

Extremity arterial injury after penetrating trauma is common in military conflict or urban trauma centers. Most peripheral arterial injuries occur in the femoral and popliteal vessels of the lower extremity. The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma first published practice management guidelines for the evaluation and treatment of penetrating lower extremity arterial trauma in 2002. Since that time, there have been advancements in the management of penetrating lower extremity arterial trauma. As a result, the Practice Management Guidelines Committee set out to develop updated guidelines.

METHODS

A MEDLINE computer search was performed using PubMed (www.pubmed.gov). The search retrieved English language articles regarding penetrating lower extremity trauma from 1998 to 2011. References of these articles were also used to locate articles not identified through the MEDLINE search. Letters to the editor, case reports, book chapters, and review articles were excluded. The topics investigated were prehospital management, diagnostic evaluation, use of imaging technology, the role of temporary intravascular shunts, use of tourniquets, and the role of endovascular intervention.

RESULTS

Forty-three articles were identified. From this group, 20 articles were selected to construct the guidelines.

CONCLUSION

There have been changes in practice since the publication of the previous guidelines in 2002. Expedited triage of patients is possible with physical examination and/or the measurement of ankle-brachial indices. Computed tomographic angiography has become the diagnostic study of choice when imaging is required. Tourniquets and intravascular shunts have emerged as adjuncts in the treatment of penetrating lower extremity arterial trauma. The role of endovascular intervention warrants further investigation.

Challenges in the management of extremity vascular injuries: A wartime experience from a tertiary centre in Sri Lanka

Background

Management of peripheral vascular injuries often present critical challenges in resource limited settings of developing countries. The additional burden from a military conflict poses further challenges. Delays in presentation often result in the loss of limb and even life, in what is usually a young active population. The objective of this report is to analyse the early outcome of vascular intervention at a tertiary referral centre in Sri Lanka.

Methods

A retrospective descriptive review of eighty one consecutive extremity vascular injuries in seventy patients during a seven month period was performed with regards to the cause of injury, types of presentations, ischaemia time, interventional procedures, complications and early outcome.

Results

Mean age was 31.2 years (9-72 years) and 96% were males. Injuries were caused by blasts in 41%, cuts in 26%, gunshots in 17% and road traffic injuries in 9%. Indications for revascularization were acute ischaemia in 44%, active bleeding in 43% and pseudo-aneurysms in 13%. Six patients underwent primary amputations due to non-viable limbs. 64 patients underwent vascular intervention. Fifty one percent needed vein grafts while 46% had direct repairs. Bleeding was often (73%) from upper extremity injuries. Median time to revascularization was 5.5 (2-16) hours with all limbs salvaged. Acute ischaemia (40%) was often from popliteal injuries. Median time to revascularization was 10 (5-18) hours and viability was prejudged at fasciotomy. 92% of revascularized limbs were salvaged. There was no perioperative mortality.

Conclusions

Results from vascular repairs are encouraging despite significant delays.

The role of interventional radiology in trauma

Since the development of angiography and transcatheter techniques, interventional radiology has played an important role in the management of trauma patients. The ability to treat life-threatening hemorrhage with transcatheter embolization has spared countless patients the morbidity of surgery. Advances in cross-sectional imaging and increases in understanding of which patients will best benefit from embolization promise to further refine the interventional radiologist's role. As the applications of transcatheter therapy broaden to include embolization of unstable patients with solid organ injuries and endovascular repair of major arterial injuries, the interventional radiologist must be increasingly prepared to provide prompt, efficient, and high-quality service.