Impact of urgent resuscitative surgery for life-threatening torso trauma

Purpose This study investigated the advantages of performing urgent resuscitative surgery (URS) in the emergency department (ED); namely, our URS policy, to avoid a delay in hemorrhage control for patients with severe torso trauma and unstable vital signs. Methods We divided 264 eligible cases into...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Surgery today (Tokyo, Japan) Japan), 2017-07, Vol.47 (7), p.827-835
Main Authors: Matsumoto, Hisashi, Hara, Yoshiaki, Yagi, Takanori, Saito, Nobuyuki, Mashiko, Kazuki, Iida, Hiroaki, Motomura, Tomokazu, Nakayama, Fumihiko, Okada, Kazuhiro, Yasumatsu, Hiroshi, Sakamoto, Taigo, Seo, Takao, Konda, Yusuke, Hattori, You, Yokota, Hiroyuki
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aged
Ambulatory Care
Female
Glasgow Coma Scale
Hemorrhage - mortality
Hemorrhage - prevention & control
Hemorrhage - surgery
Hemostasis, Surgical - mortality
Humans
Male
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Original
Original Article
Resuscitation - methods
Retrospective Studies
Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Survival Rate
Systole
Torso - injuries
Torso - surgery
Trauma Severity Indices
Vital Signs
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose This study investigated the advantages of performing urgent resuscitative surgery (URS) in the emergency department (ED); namely, our URS policy, to avoid a delay in hemorrhage control for patients with severe torso trauma and unstable vital signs. Methods We divided 264 eligible cases into a URS group ( n  = 97) and a non-URS group ( n  = 167) to compare, retrospectively, the observed survival rate with the predicted survival using the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS). Results While the revised trauma score and the injury severity score were significantly lower in the URS group than in the non-URS group, the observed survival rate was significantly higher than the predicted rate in the URS (48.5 vs. 40.2%; p  = 0.038). URS group patients with a systolic blood pressure (SBP) 
ISSN:0941-1291
1436-2813
DOI:10.1007/s00595-016-1451-0