Current Approaches to Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta Use in Trauma and Obstetrics

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linden O. Lee ◽  
Paul Potnuru ◽  
Christopher T. Stephens ◽  
Evan G. Pivalizza
Keyword(s):  
Balloon Occlusion ◽  
Endovascular Balloon Occlusion

Successful Control of Massive Vaginal Bleeding with Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta and Pelvic Packing

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emre Özlüer ◽  
Çagaç Yetis ◽  
Evrim Sayin ◽  
Mücahit Avcil
Keyword(s):  
Vaginal Bleeding ◽  
Balloon Occlusion ◽  
Emergency Physicians ◽  
Pelvic Packing ◽  
Gynecological Malignancies ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
Successful Control ◽  
Endovascular Balloon Occlusion

Gynecological malignancies may present as life-threatening vaginal bleeding. Pelvic packing and Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) may be useful along with conventional vaginal packing when in terms of control of the hemorrhage. Emergency physicians should be able to perform these interventions promptly in order to save their patients from exsanguination.

AORTA Registry 7F vs 11-12 F access

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Reviewer Joseph DuBose ◽  
Jonathan Morrison ◽  
Megan Brenner ◽  
Laura Moore ◽  
John B Holcomb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ultrasound Guidance ◽  
Balloon Occlusion ◽  
Aortic Occlusion ◽  
Severely Injured ◽  
Distal Extremity ◽  
Low Profile ◽  
Transfusion Requirements ◽  
Thrombotic Complications ◽  
Device Use ◽  
Endovascular Balloon Occlusion

ABSTRACT Introduction:  The introduction of low profile devices designed for Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) after trauma has the potential to change practice, outcomes and complication profiles related to this procedure. Methods: The AAST Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (AORTA) registry was utilized to identify REBOA patients from 16 centers -comparing presentation, intervention and outcome variables for those REBOA via traditional 11-12 access platforms and trauma-specific devices requiring only 7 F access. Results:From Nov 2013-Dec 2017, 242 patients with completed data were identified, constituting 124 7F and 118 11-12F uses. Demographics of presentation were not different between the two groups, except that the 7F patients had a higher mean ISS (39.2 34.1, p = 0.028). 7F device use was associated with a lower cut-down requirement for access (22.6% vs. 37.3%, p = 0.049) and increased ultrasound guidance utilization (29.0% 23.7%, p = 0.049). 7F device afforded earlier aortic occlusion in the course of resuscitation (median 25.0 mins vs. 30 mins, p = 0.010), and had lower median PRBC (10.0 vs. 15.5 units, p = 0.006) and FFP requirements (7.5 vs. 14.0 units, p = 0.005). 7F patients were more likely to survive 24 hrs (58.1% vs. 42.4%, p = 0.015) and less likely to suffer in-hospital mortality (57.3% vs. 75.4%, p = 0.003). Finally, 7F device use was associated with a 4X lower rate of distal extremity embolism (20.0% vs. 5.6%, p = 0.014;OR 95% CI 4.25 [1.25-14.45]) compared to 11-12F counterparts. Conclusion: The introduction of trauma specific 7F REBOA devices appears to have influenced REBOA practices, with earlier utilization in severely injured hypotensive patients via less invasive means that are associated with lower transfusion requirements fewer thrombotic complications and improved survival. Additional study is required to determine optimal REBOA utilization.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) enables operative management of the peripartum trauma patient in hemorrhagic shock

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelvin Allenson ◽  
Laura Moore
Keyword(s):  
Maternal Death ◽  
Motor Vehicle ◽  
Operative Management ◽  
Balloon Occlusion ◽  
Motor Vehicle Accidents ◽  
Gravid Uterus ◽  
Intrauterine Pregnancy ◽  
Vehicle Accidents ◽  
Pelvic Hemorrhage ◽  
Endovascular Balloon Occlusion

Trauma related injury is the leading cause of non-obstetric maternal death.  The gravid uterus is at risk for injury, particularly during motor vehicle accidents.  Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a means of controlling pelvic hemorrhage in the setting of trauma.  We report the use of REBOA in a hemodynamically unstable, multiply-injured young woman with viable intrauterine pregnancy.

Use of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) as a bridge to endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in blunt abdominal aortic injury (BAAI).

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentina Chiarini
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Center ◽  
Aortic Rupture ◽  
Damage Control ◽  
Aortic Injury ◽  
Balloon Occlusion ◽  
Traumatic Lesion ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Aortic Injuries ◽  
Accepted Practice ◽  
Endovascular Balloon Occlusion

BAAI is a rare but challenging traumatic lesion. Since BAAI is difficult to suspect and diagnose, frequently lethal and associated to multiorgan injuries, its management is objective of research and discussion. REBOA is an accepted practice in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Conversely, blunt aortic injuries are the currently most cited contraindications for the use of REBOA in trauma, together with thoracic lesions. We reported a case of BAAI safely managed in our Trauma Center at Maggiore Hospital in Bologna (Italy) utilizing REBOA as a bridge to endovascular repair, since there were no imminent indications for laparotomy. Despite formal contraindication to placing REBOA in aortic rupture, we hypothesized that this approach could be feasible and relatively safe when introduced in a resuscitative damage control protocol.

Use of ER-REBOA to Reverse Traumatic Arrest After Non-Truncal Bleeding

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Chance Spalding ◽  
Matthew L Moorman ◽  
John B Holcomb
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Balloon Occlusion ◽  
Successful Case ◽  
Endovascular Balloon Occlusion

We report a successful case of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) to control hemorrhage in a patient with cardiac arrest secondary to non-truncal hemorrhage.

scholarly journals Aktuelle Ist-Analyse zur Situation des nichttraumatologischen Schockraummanagements in Deutschland

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Michael ◽  
S. Bax ◽  
M. Finke ◽  
M. Hoffmann ◽  
S. Kornstädt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chest Compression ◽  
Balloon Occlusion ◽  
Kritisch Kranke Patienten ◽  
Compression Device ◽  
Kritisch Kranke ◽  
E Mail ◽  
Endovascular Balloon Occlusion

Zusammenfassung Einleitung In Notaufnahmen kommen bundesweit nichttraumatologische kritisch kranke Patienten zur Aufnahme. Zur Struktur, Organisation und Ausstattung des nichttraumatologischen Schockraummanagements ist bisher wenig bekannt. Mittels einer Umfrage sollte daher der Ist-Zustand analysiert werden. Methodik Durch die Arbeitsgruppe „Schockraum“ der Deutschen Gesellschaft Interdisziplinäre Notfall- und Akutmedizin (DGINA) wurde mittels E‑Mail den 420 ärztlichen Leiter*Innen des DGINA-Mitgliederregisters eine Onlineumfrage zugesendet. Zwei Wochen nach initialem Anschreiben erfolgte eine Erinnerung. Die Ergebnisse wurden in einer anonymisierten Datenbank extrahiert und ausgewertet. Ergebnisse Insgesamt lag die Rücklaufquote mit 131 verwertbaren Antworten bei 31 %. Die Umfrage erfasste Krankenhäuser der Basis- (24 %), erweiterten (39 %) und umfassenden Notfallversorgung (37 %). Korrespondierend zur Versorgungsstufe stiegen die jährlichen Patientenkontakte (21.000 vs. 31.000 vs. 39.000), die Monitorplätze in den Notaufnahmen (9 ± 4 vs. 13 ± 6 vs. 18 ± 10), die Betten der assoziierten Notaufnahmestationen (4 ± 5 vs. 10 ± 17 vs. 13 ± 12), die verfügbaren Schockräume (1 ± 1 vs. 2 ± 1 vs. 3 ± 1) und deren Größe (31 ± 16 vs. 35 ± 9 vs. 38 ± 14 m2) an. Hinsichtlich verschiedener Ausstattungsmerkmale (z. B. Röntgenlafette: 58 vs. 65 vs. 78 %, Computertomographie im Schockraum: 6 vs. 12 vs. 27 %) zeigten sich deutliche Unterschiede in Abhängigkeit von der Versorgungsstufe. Während Kühlungssysteme in 30 % in allen Versorgungsstufen vorgehalten wurden, fanden sich andere Ausstattungsmerkmale (z. B. Videolaryngoskopie: 65 vs. 80 vs. 86 %, Bronchoskopie: 29 vs. 22 vs. 45 %) und spezielle Notfallprozeduren (z. B. REBOA [„resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta“]: 3 vs. 5 vs. 12 %, ACCD [„automated chest compression device“]: 26 vs. 57 vs. 61 %) häufiger in höheren Versorgungsstufen. Schlussfolgerung Die vorliegenden Ergebnisse zeigen erstmals den Ist-Zustand der nichttraumatologischen Schockraumversorgung in verschiedenen Versorgungsstufen in Deutschland. Empfehlungen zu Ausstattungsmerkmalen für das nichttraumatologische Schockraummanagement müssen zukünftig formuliert werden.

914 A Comparison of Mortality, Indicators of Treatment Success and Complications of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of Aorta (REBOA): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
H J Ko ◽  
H F Koo ◽  
S Froghi ◽  
N Al-Saadi
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Estimation Method ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Balloon Occlusion ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Resuscitative Thoracotomy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Endovascular Balloon Occlusion

Abstract Introduction This study aims to provide an updated review on in-hospital mortality rates in patients who underwent Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of Aorta (REBOA) versus Resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) or standard care without REBOA, to identify potential indicators of REBOA use and complications. Method Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines were used to perform the study. A literature search was done from 01 January 2005 to 30 June 2020 using EMBASE, MEDLINE and COCHRANE databases. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model and the DerSimonian and Laird estimation method. Results 25 studies were included in this study. The odds of in-hospital mortality of patients who underwent REBOA compared to RT was 0.18 (p < 0.01). The odds of in-hospital survival of patients who underwent REBOA compared to non-REBOA was 1.28 (p = 0.62). There was a significant difference found between survivors and non-survivors in terms of their pre-REBOA systolic blood pressure (SBP) (19.26 mmHg, p < 0.01), post-REBOA SBP (20.73 mmHg, p < 0.01), duration of aortic occlusion (-40.57 mins, p < 0.01) and ISS (-8.50, p < 0.01). Common complications of REBOA included acute kidney injury, multi-organ dysfunction and thrombosis. Conclusions Our study demonstrated lower in-hospital mortality of REBOA versus RT. Prospective multi-centre studies are needed for further evaluation of the indications, feasibility, and complications of REBOA.

scholarly journals Increased crystalloid fluid requirements during zone 3 Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) versus Abdominal Aortic and Junctional Tourniquet (AAJT) after class II hemorrhage in swine

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Brännström ◽  
Albin Dahlquist ◽  
Jenny Gustavsson ◽  
Ulf P. Arborelius ◽  
Mattias Günther
Keyword(s):  
Fluid Management ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Balloon Occlusion ◽  
Metabolic Effects ◽  
Total Blood ◽  
Crystalloid Fluid ◽  
Vasopressor Support ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
Endovascular Balloon Occlusion

Abstract Purpose Pelvic and lower junctional hemorrhage result in a significant amount of trauma related deaths in military and rural civilian environments. The Abdominal Aortic and Junctional Tourniquet (AAJT) and infra-renal (zone 3) Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) are two options for resuscitation of patients with life threatening blood loss from and distal to the pelvis. Evidence suggest differences in the hemodynamic response between AAJT and zone 3 REBOA, but fluid management during resuscitation with the devices has not been fully elucidated. We compared crystalloid fluid requirements (Ringer’s acetate) between these devices to maintain a carotid mean arterial pressure (MAP) > 60 mmHg. Methods 60 kg anesthetized and mechanically ventilated male pigs were subjected to a mean 1030 (range 900–1246) mL (25% of estimated total blood volume, class II) haemorrhage. AAJT (n = 6) or zone 3 REBOA (n = 6) were then applied for 240 min. Crystalloid fluids were administered to maintain carotid MAP. The animals were monitored for 30 min after reperfusion. Results Cumulative resuscitative fluid requirements increased 7.2 times (mean difference 2079 mL; 95% CI 627–3530 mL) in zone 3 REBOA (mean 2412; range 800–4871 mL) compared to AAJT (mean 333; range 0–1000 mL) to maintain target carotid MAP. Release of the AAJT required vasopressor support with norepinephrine infusion for a mean 9.6 min (0.1 µg/kg/min), while REBOA release required no vasopressor support. Conclusion Zone 3 REBOA required 7.2 times more crystalloids to maintain the targeted MAP. The AAJT may therefore be considered in a situation of hemorrhagic shock to limit the need for crystalloid infusions, although removal of the AAJT caused more severe hemodynamic and metabolic effects which required vasopressor support.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document