Humerus fracture and combined venous injury increases limb loss in axillary or subclavian artery injury

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.

Treatment of vascular non-iatrogenic injuries of upper and lower extremities in tertiary vascular center

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine demographic and baseline characteristics of patients with vascular injuries of extremities and to define the most relevant factors which influenced an early outcome, as well as limb salvage after the management of vascular trauma.

METHODS

This study used the database that included 395 patients with peripheral arterial injuries, who were treated in the tertiary vascular university center in the period between 2005-2020. Exclusion criteria were isolated thoracic, abdominal and neck injuries as well as iatrogenic injuries and injuries of intravenous addicts. Univariate binary logistic regression analysis and multiple logistic regression were used to determine risk factors for lomb loss (after vascular reconstruction) or mortality. Decision to perform primary amputation (without vascular reconstruction) was based on surgeons' preference and experience.

RESULTS

Out of 395 vascular injuries treated in the period 2005-2020, 210 (53.2%) presented with non-iatrogenic vascular injuries of upper and lower extremities were analyzed. According to the univariate regression analysis, hemorrhage as the main clinical manifestation on admission (P=0.035) and early reintervention (P=0.048) increased, while an early patency of repaired artery (0.010) significantly decreased a 30-day amputation rate. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of these three variables showed that only early patency of repaired artery significantly decreased the early amputation rate (P=0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on presented experience, the patency of vascular reconstruction plays a crucial role in limb salvage in patients with non-iatrogenic peripheral vascular injuries. All factors that might influence the patency should be in focus of improvement.

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.

Impact of Endovascular Stenting on Outcomes in Patients with Traumatic Subclavian Artery Injury

BACKGROUND

Traumatic subclavian artery injury (SAI) remains uncommon but can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Although open and endovascular repair offer excellent limb salvage rates, their role in blunt and penetrating injuries is not well defined. The goal of this study was to examine the effect of mechanism of injury and type of repair on outcomes in patients with traumatic SAI.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients undergoing procedures for traumatic SAI were identified from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database between 2015 and 2018. Demographics, severity of injury and shock, type of subclavian repair (open vs endovascular), morbidity, and mortality were recorded. Patients with SAI were stratified by mechanism and type of repair and compared. Multivariable logistic regression (MLR) analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of mortality.

RESULTS

Seven hundred thirty-seven patients undergoing procedures for SAI were identified. Of these, 39% were penetrating. The majority were male (80%) with a median age and Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 37 and 21, respectively. 58% of patients were managed endovascularly. For patients with blunt injury, the type of repair affected neither morbidity (25% vs 19%, p = 0.116) nor mortality (11% vs 10%, p = 0.70). For patients with penetrating injuries, endovascular repair had significantly lower morbidity (12% vs 22%, p = 0.028) and mortality (6% vs 21%, p = 0.001). MLR identified endovascular repair as the only modifiable risk factor associated with reduced mortality (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.87, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

SAI results in significant morbidity and mortality regardless of mechanism. Although the type of repair did not affect mortality in patients with blunt injury, endovascular repair was identified as the only modifiable predictor of reduced mortality in patients with penetrating injuries.

Five-Year Management of Vascular Injuries of the Extremities in the "Real-World" Setting in Northeastern Greece: The Role of Iatrogenic Traumas

BACKGROUND

Vascular trauma comprises a diagnostic and surgical challenge. Aim of this study was to present the vascular traumas treated in our Tertiary Hospital during the last 5 years.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the surgical records of our vascular department and documented the site and type of vascular injuries of the extremities along with the concurrence of musculoskeletal injuries. The type and outcome of surgical interventions were also recorded.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight cases of vascular trauma were recorded (39 in the upper and 19 in the lower extremities). Overall, iatrogenic traumas accounted for 41.3% of cases. The arterial injuries of the upper limb were blunt and penetrating in 27% and 67%, respectively. The most affected artery in the upper limb was the radial artery (37.8%), followed by the ulnar artery (27%) and the brachial artery (24.3%). Orthopedic injuries were recorded in 19% of patients. Management involved simple revascularization, bypass operations, patch arterioplasty and endovascular management in 48.7%, 33.3%, 5.1%, and 5.1%, respectively. The most affected site in the lower extremity was the common femoral artery (36.8%) followed by the popliteal artery (21%). Bone fractures were reported in 5 cases (26.3%). The surgical management involved bypass, simple revascularization, patch arterioplasty in 42.1%, 26.3%, and 21%, respectively. Endovascular management was performed in 10.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable percentage of iatrogenic vascular injuries was recorded, affecting both the upper and lower limbs. Despite the trend toward centralization of vascular services, a basic service of vascular surgery should be available in most sites to ensure that patients with vascular injuries receive fast and appropriate care.

Successful management with endovascular stent graft repair following gunshot wound to the subclavian artery: Case report and literature review

•

Penetrating injuries to the subclavian artery are usually the result of stab wounds or gunshot wounds.

•

Endovascular stent graft repair of traumatic subclavian artery injuries is a feasible alternative to open surgical approach.

•

Several studies have reported that endovascular approach is associated with a decreased morbidity and mortality compared to open approach.

Introduction

Penetrating injuries to the subclavian artery are usually the result of gunshot wounds or stab wounds. While subclavian artery injuries are relatively uncommon, vascular injuries due to penetrating trauma are frequently encountered at Trauma Centers. Despite advances in modern medicine, these injuries are associated with a high mortality and can lead to devastating morbidity.

Presentation of case

We report a case of a 20-year-old male who presented after sustaining multiple gunshot wounds to his left upper and lower extremities. He underwent an emergent repair of a left axillo-subclavian artery injury via an endovascular approach using a covered self-expanding stent and was discharged after less than a week.

Discussion

Historically, open surgical repair was considered the gold standard in the management of subclavian artery injury. However, rapid technological developments and advances in vascular surgery offer alternative management approaches in traumatic vascular surgery. In a select subset of trauma patients with penetrating vascular injuries, a minimally invasive endovascular approach may be an option. Endovascular repairs are associated with shorter operative times, less blood loss, lower complications and also a reduced mortality rate.

Conclusion

Endovascular stent graft prostheses offer a minimally invasive treatment modality in the management of traumatic penetrating subclavian artery injuries.