TY - JOUR
T1 - The evolution of care improves outcome in blunt thoracic aortic injury
T2 - A Western Trauma Association multicenter study
AU - Shackford, Steven R.
AU - Dunne, Casey E.
AU - Karmy-Jones, Riyad
AU - Long, William
AU - Teso, Desarom
AU - Schreiber, Martin A.
AU - Watson, Justin
AU - Watson, Cheri
AU - McIntyre, Robert C.
AU - Ferrigno, Lisa
AU - Shapiro, Mark L.
AU - Southerland, Kevin
AU - Dunn, Julie A.
AU - Reckard, Paul
AU - Scalea, Thomas M.
AU - Brenner, Megan
AU - Teeter, William A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/12/1
Y1 - 2017/12/1
N2 - BACKGROUND The management of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) has evolved radically in the last decade with changes in the processes of care and the introduction of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). These changes have wrought improved outcome, but the direct effect of TEVAR on outcome remains in question as previous studies have lacked vigorous risk adjustment and long-term follow-up. To address these knowledge gaps, we compared the outcomes of TEVAR, open surgical repair, and nonoperative management for BTAI. METHODS Eight verified trauma centers recruited from the Western Trauma Association Multicenter Study Group retrospectively studied all patients with BTAI admitted between January 1, 2006, and June 30, 2016. Data included demographics, comorbidities, admitting physiology, injury severity, in-hospital care, and outcome. RESULTS We studied 316 patients with BTAI; 57 (18.0%) were in extremis and died before treatment. Of the 259 treated surgically, TEVAR was performed in 176 (68.0%), open in 28 (10.8%), hybrid in 4 (1.5%), and nonoperative in 51 (19.7%). Thoracic endovascular aortic repair and open repair groups had similar Injury Severity Scale score, chest Abbreviated Injury Scale score, Trauma and Injury Severity Score, and probability of survival, but differed in median age (open: 28 [interquartile range {IQR}, 19-51]; TEVAR: 46 [IQR, 28-60]; p < 0.007), zone of aortic injury (p < 0.001), and grade of aortic injury (open: 6 [IQR, 4-6]; TEVAR: 2 [IQR, 2-4]; p < 0.001). The overall in-hospital mortality was 6.6% (TEVAR: 5.7%, open: 10.7%, nonoperative: 3.9%; p = 0.535). Of the 240 patients who survived to discharge, two died (one at 9 months and one at 8 years); both were managed with TEVAR, but the deaths were unrelated to the aortic procedure. Stent graft surveillance computed tomography scans were not obtained in 37.6%. CONCLUSIONS The mortality of BTAI continues to decrease. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair, when anatomically suitable, should be the treatment of choice. Open repair remains necessary for more proximal injuries. Process improvement in computed tomography imaging in follow-up of TEVAR is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/care management, level III.
AB - BACKGROUND The management of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) has evolved radically in the last decade with changes in the processes of care and the introduction of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). These changes have wrought improved outcome, but the direct effect of TEVAR on outcome remains in question as previous studies have lacked vigorous risk adjustment and long-term follow-up. To address these knowledge gaps, we compared the outcomes of TEVAR, open surgical repair, and nonoperative management for BTAI. METHODS Eight verified trauma centers recruited from the Western Trauma Association Multicenter Study Group retrospectively studied all patients with BTAI admitted between January 1, 2006, and June 30, 2016. Data included demographics, comorbidities, admitting physiology, injury severity, in-hospital care, and outcome. RESULTS We studied 316 patients with BTAI; 57 (18.0%) were in extremis and died before treatment. Of the 259 treated surgically, TEVAR was performed in 176 (68.0%), open in 28 (10.8%), hybrid in 4 (1.5%), and nonoperative in 51 (19.7%). Thoracic endovascular aortic repair and open repair groups had similar Injury Severity Scale score, chest Abbreviated Injury Scale score, Trauma and Injury Severity Score, and probability of survival, but differed in median age (open: 28 [interquartile range {IQR}, 19-51]; TEVAR: 46 [IQR, 28-60]; p < 0.007), zone of aortic injury (p < 0.001), and grade of aortic injury (open: 6 [IQR, 4-6]; TEVAR: 2 [IQR, 2-4]; p < 0.001). The overall in-hospital mortality was 6.6% (TEVAR: 5.7%, open: 10.7%, nonoperative: 3.9%; p = 0.535). Of the 240 patients who survived to discharge, two died (one at 9 months and one at 8 years); both were managed with TEVAR, but the deaths were unrelated to the aortic procedure. Stent graft surveillance computed tomography scans were not obtained in 37.6%. CONCLUSIONS The mortality of BTAI continues to decrease. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair, when anatomically suitable, should be the treatment of choice. Open repair remains necessary for more proximal injuries. Process improvement in computed tomography imaging in follow-up of TEVAR is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/care management, level III.
KW - BTAI
KW - Blunt thoracic aortic injury
KW - TEVAR
KW - outcomes
KW - thoracic endovascular aortic repair
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85019578979&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85019578979&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/TA.0000000000001555
DO - 10.1097/TA.0000000000001555
M3 - Article
C2 - 28538630
AN - SCOPUS:85019578979
SN - 2163-0755
VL - 83
SP - 1006
EP - 1013
JO - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
JF - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
IS - 6
ER -