Venous thromboembolism after penetrating femoral and popliteal artery injuries: an opportunity for increased prevention

Systematic review and meta-analysis of endovascular therapy versus open surgical repair for the traumatic lower extremity arterial injury

OBJECTIVE

For traumatic lower extremity artery injury, it is unclear whether it is better to perform endovascular therapy (ET) or open surgical repair (OSR). This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of ET versus OSR for traumatic lower extremity artery injury.

METHODS

The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Databases were searched for studies. Cohort studies and case series reporting outcomes of ET or OSR were eligible for inclusion. Robins-I tool and an 18-item tool were used to assess the risk of bias. The primary outcome was amputation. The secondary outcomes included fasciotomy or compartment syndrome, mortality, length of stay and lower extremity nerve injury. We used the random effects model to calculate pooled estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies with low or moderate risk of bias were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that patients who underwent ET had a significantly decreased risk of major amputation (OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.21-0.85; I2=34%) and fasciotomy or compartment syndrome (OR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.20-0.50, I2 = 14%) than patients who underwent OSR. No significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding all-cause mortality (OR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.75-1.64, I2 = 31%). Patients with ET repair had a shorter length of stay than patients with OSR repair (MD=-5.06, 95% CI -6.76 to -3.36, I2 = 65%). Intraoperative nerve injury was just reported in OSR patients with a pooled incidence of 15% (95% CI 6%-27%).

CONCLUSION

Endovascular therapy may represent a better choice for patients with traumatic lower extremity arterial injury, because it can provide lower risks of amputation, fasciotomy or compartment syndrome, and nerve injury, as well as shorter length of stay.

Open versus endovascular repair of penetrating non-aortic arterial injuries: A systematic review and meta analysis

BACKGROUND

Non-aortic arterial injuries are common and are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Historically, open surgical repair (OSR) was the conventional method of repair. With recent advancements in minimally invasive techniques, endovascular repair (ER) has gained popularity. We sought to compare outcomes in patients undergoing endovascular and open repairs of traumatic non-aortic penetrating arterial injuries.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using MEDLINE (OVID), Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus Database from January 1st, 1990, to March 20th, 2023. Titles and abstracts were screened, followed by full text review. Articles assessing clinically important outcomes between OSR and ER in penetrating arterial injuries were included. Exclusion criteria included blunt injuries, aortic injuries, pediatric populations, review articles, and non-English articles. Odds ratios (OR) and Cohen's d ratios were used to quantify differences in morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 3770 articles were identified, of which 8 met inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The articles comprised a total of 8369 patients of whom 90 % were male with a median age of 28 years. 85 % of patients were treated with OSR while 15 % underwent ER. With regards to injury characteristics, those who underwent ER were less likely to present with concurrent venous injuries (OR: 0.41; 95 %CI: 0.18, 0.94; p = 0.03). Regarding hospital outcomes, patients who underwent ER had a lower likelihood of in-hospital or 30-day mortality (OR: 0.72; 95 %CI: 0.55, 0.95; p = 0.02) and compartment syndrome (OR: 0.29, 95 %CI: 0.12, 0.71; p = 0.007). The overall risk of bias was moderate.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular repair of non-aortic penetrating arterial injuries is increasingly common, however open repair remains the most common approach. Compared to ER, OSR was associated with higher odds of compartment syndrome and mortality. Further prospective research is warranted to determine the patient populations and injury patterns that most significantly benefit from an endovascular approach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses.

Prognostic factors for femoropopliteal vascular injuries: surgical decisions matter

Background

Lower limbs are frequently involved in vascular trauma, but it is still not clear which factors lead to unfavorable clinical outcomes.

Objectives

To determine the clinical profile of patients with femoropopliteal injuries, the trauma mechanisms, and treatment and identify which factors led to unfavorable outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective study based on the medical records of patients treated from 2017 to 2021. The following data were assessed: sex, age, distance to reach the hospital, trauma mechanism, hypovolemic shock, additional injuries, treatment of vascular injuries, whether fasciotomy was needed, inappropriate intraoperative decisions, and injury severity score. Need for surgical reintervention, amputation, and death were defined as unfavorable outcomes. Univariate, bivariate, and logistic regression analyses were conducted.

Results

The sample comprised 94 patients; 83% were men; mean age was 30.8 years; combined arterial and venous injuries prevailed (57.5%); and superficial femoral vessels were the most affected (61.7%). Penetrating mechanisms prevailed (80.9%). Arterial injuries were most frequently treated with venous graft (59.6%) and venous injuries underwent ligation (81.4%). In 15% of cases, inappropriate surgical decisions were detected; most often use of the ipsilateral great saphenous vein for arterial reconstruction. Unfavorable outcomes occurred in 44.7%: surgical reintervention was necessary in 21.3% and limb amputation in 25.5%, while 9.5% of the patients died.

Conclusions

These injuries mainly involved young men, victims of gunshot wounds. Superficial femoral vessels were the most injured; concomitant non-vascular trauma was frequent, mainly fractures. Inappropriate surgical decisions increased the need for reinterventions by 34 times. Need for fasciotomy, presence of fracture/dislocation, blunt trauma mechanism, and popliteal artery injury increased the risk of amputation.

Analysis of Concomitant and Isolated Venous Injury in Military Lower Extremity Trauma

OBJECTIVES

The implications of major venous injury to the lower extremity are not well established. We aimed to determine the significance of concomitant and isolated femoropopliteal venous injury and assess the impact of surgical management strategies on limb outcomes.

METHODS

The Fasciotomy and Vascular Injury Outcomes Database was queried for limbs sustaining femoropopliteal arterial, venous, or concomitant injuries in Iraq or Afghanistan between 2004-2012. Demographics, injury patterns and severity, interventions, and outcomes were compared between patients sustaining isolated arterial injuries (IAI) and concomitant arteriovenous injuries (AVI). In limbs with any venous injury, outcomes were compared between those undergoing venous (VR) and ligation (VL).

RESULTS

330 patients (133 IAI, 135 AVI, 62 isolated venous injuries (IVI)) were included. AVI was associated with greater limb injury severity: median extremity Abbreviated Injury Scale (AVI 4 vs. IAI 3, p=0.01), Mangled Extremity Severity Score >7 (25.9% vs. 13.5%, p= 0.01), multi-level vascular injury (6.7% vs. 0.8%, p=0.01) and with greater fasciotomy use (83.0% vs. 69.2%, p=0.01). No differences were present in tourniquet use/time, shunting, or nature of arterial repair. No differences in vascular or limb complications (71.1% vs. 63.9%, p=0.21) or amputation rate (25.9% vs. 18.8%, p=0.16) were present, though limb DVT rate was 12.6% in AVI vs. 7.5% in IAI (p=0.17). Limbs with IVI had a 12.9% amputation and a 74.2% complication rate. Repair (n=103) versus ligation (n=94) of venous injuries was not associated with a difference in amputation (18.4% vs. 25.5%, p=0.23) or limb complication rates (71.8% vs. 72.3%, p=0.94).

CONCLUSION

Despite higher extremity injury severity and more frequent fasciotomies, concomitant venous injury was not associated with poorer limb salvage or complications. With nontrivial amputation and complication rates, IVI is indicative of severe limb trauma. Repair of femoropopliteal venous injuries does not appear to influence limb outcomes.

Early positive fluid balance is predictive for venous thromboembolism in critically ill surgical patients

BACKGROUND

Positive fluid balance (FB) in the intensive care unit (ICU) may be a marker for increased venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk. We hypothesized that an early positive fluid balance (FB) would be associated with increased VTE occurrence.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective review of surgical ICU patients was conducted from May 2011 to December 2014. Patients with a VTE were compared to those who did not develop a VTE (NVTE).

RESULTS

There were 619 patients analyzed with 77 (12.4%) diagnosed with a VTE; these patients had longer ventilator days (12.3 vs. 5.0 days, p < 0.01) and ICU stays (10.3 vs. 6.4 days, p < 0.01), and were more likely to have a net FB ≥ 4L over the first three days (62% vs. 44%, p < 0.01). A FB ≥ 4L over the first three ICU days was an independent predictor of VTE (AOR 1.74, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Patients with an early positive FB are more likely to develop a VTE.