BACKGROUND: Hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures often require a multi-modal approach including both operative and endovascular management. While an important adjunct in hemorrhage control, time to angioembolization even at the most advanced trauma centers may take hours. Extraperitoneal packing (EPP) is a fast and effective procedure that can immediately address pelvic hemorrhage from the retroperitoneal space in severe pelvic injuries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of early EPP, looking at 24 hours and overall mortality, and the hemodynamic impact of EPP in unstable blunt pelvic trauma. METHODS: All trauma patients admitted to an urban Level I trauma center were evaluated from 2002 to 2018 in a retrospective single-center comparative study. Inclusion criteria were patients 14 years or older who sustained blunt trauma with pelvic fractures and hemodynamic instability. Exclusion criteria were a concomitant head injury (Abbreviated Injury Scale >3) and patients who underwent resuscitative thoracotomy. The patient population was divided into two groups: an EPP group and a no-EPP group. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics in the two groups: a one-to-one matched analysis using nearest-neighbor matching was performed based on the estimated propensity score of each patient. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-four patients presented hemodynamically unstable, with a pelvic fracture (180 no-EPP, 64 EPP). With propensity score matching, 37 patients in each group were analyzed. Survival within the first 24 hours was significantly improved in the EPP group (81.1% vs. 59.5%, p = 0.042) and we registered similar results in overall survival rate (78.4% EPP group vs. 56.8% no-EPP group, p = 0.047). Those patients who underwent early EPP (n = 64) were associated with a significant improvement in hemodynamic stability, with a pre-EPP mean arterial pressure of 49.9 mm Hg and post-EPP mean arterial pressure of 70.1 mm Hg (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Extraperitoneal pelvic packing is an effective procedure that can be performed immediately, even within the trauma bay, to improve hemodynamic stability and overall survival in patients who sustain severe blunt pelvic trauma. The early use of EPP can be lifesaving. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level III.

Pelvic trauma continues to have a high mortality rate despite damage control techniques for bleeding control. The aim of our study was to evaluate how Extra-peritoneal Pelvic Packing (EPP) and Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) impact the efficacy on mortality and hemodynamic impact. We retrospectively evaluated patients who sustained blunt trauma, pelvic fracture and hemodynamic instability from 2002 to 2018. We excluded a concomitant severe brain injury, resuscitative thoracotomy, penetrating trauma and age below 14 years old. The study population was divided in EPP and REBOA Zone III group. Propensity score matching was used to adjust baseline differences and then a one-to-one matched analysis was performed. We selected 83 patients, 10 for group: survival rate was higher in EPP group, but not significantly in each outcome we analyzed (24 h, 7 day, overall). EPP had a significant increase in main arterial pressure after procedure (+20.13 mmHg, p < 0.001), but this was not as great as the improvement seen in the REBOA group (+45.10 mmHg, p < 0.001). EPP and REBOA are effective and improve hemodynamic status: both are reasonable first steps in a multidisciplinary management. Zone I REBOA may be useful in patients ‘in extremis condition’ with multiple sites of torso hemorrhage, particularly those in extremis.

Background: Gastrointestinal (GI) perforations are an acute surgical dilemma, with diagnostic workup often requiring abdominal imaging. Post-operative care for these patients may vary and oftentimes includes ICU care for sepsis, but not always. We evaluated if free fluid and air on computed tomography (CT) could be associated with sepsis, septic shock and mortality in GI perforations. The aim of our study was a correlation between a new CT-scan scoring system and septic complications in GI perforations. Methods: We conducted an observational retrospective study about patients who underwent emergency surgery for intestinal perforation between January 2014 and June 2017. Inclusion criteria were a CT-scan positive for free fluid and air, and an intestinal perforation confirmed intraoperatively. A CT-score was created to evaluate location and extent of free fluid and air related to clinical outcome and prognosis. Univariate analysis between the CT score and the various clinical outcomes was conducted with the non-parametric Mann-Whitney test for continuous variables and with the chi-square test for categorical variables. Results: One-hundred and fifty-one patients were evaluated. The mortality was 23.18% and the complications were present in 45.95%. The median CT score for patients who developed complications was 3, compared with a value of 2 in the absence of complications (P=0.008). A CT score of 4 or greater had a sensitivity and specificity for predicting pre-operative sepsis of 73.33% and 64.42% respectively, and for pre-operative septic shock of 35.56% and 93.27%. Looking at post-operative sepsis, sensitivity and specificity were 57.45% and 70.19%, and for septic shock 36.17% and 85.85%. Spearman correlation analysis revealed that at higher scores at CT score corresponded higher scores at the P-POSSUM morbidity, P-POSSUM mortality and WSES Sepsis Severity Score. Conclusions: Our CT score shows a significant correlation with validated predictive scoring systems with regards to predicting sepsis, septic shock and complications—and seems to be a useful outcome predictor in GI perforation.