MONITORING / VITAL SIGNS

Vital Signs and Physiologic Derangement in Patients With Thoracic Trauma in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Keneally RJ, Szpisjak DF, Hoffmann PJ, Park EJ, Albergo MS

Mil Med. 2017 Nov;182(11):e1881-e1884

BACKGROUND: Triage is the act of stratifying the need for medical attention. Effective triage must account for injury patterns and severity. Personnel making triage decisions must also consider the patients' physiologic states. Vital signs can possibly be used to assess for the presence of physiological derangements such as coagulopathy, acidosis, or a significant base deficit. Providers could use this knowledge to assist with triage at casualty collection points where laboratory studies or point of care testing may not be available.

METHODS: With institutional approval, data were extracted from the Joint Theater Trauma Registry for all patients with thoracic trauma between 2002 and 2012. Patients were identified by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 9th Revision (ICD-9) codes. Heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and pulse pressure were correlated with coagulopathy (international normalization ratio ≥ 1.5), acidosis (pH < 7.2) or an elevated base deficit (>6) on admission. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, negative predictive values, and odds ratios were calculated.

FINDINGS: HR > 100, SBP < 90, or pulse pressure <30 were associated with an increased risk for acidosis (odds ratio 3.06 [95% confidence interval 2.48-3.78], 4.72 [3.85-5.78], and 2.73 [2.15-3.48], respectively), coagulopathy (2.21 [1.72-2.83], 4.55 [3.57-5.80], and 2.73 [2.15-3.48], respectively), and base deficit >6 (2.17 [1.88-2.50], 3.48 [2.87-4.22], and 2.22 [1.78-2.77], respectively). HR was a moderately sensitive marker (0.74), whereas SBP was a specific marker (0.93).

DISCUSSION: SBP < 90 is an effective marker for ruling in physiologic derangement after thoracic trauma. HR > 100 was associated with over twice the odds for physiologic derangement. Vital signs can be used to assess for physiologic derangement in the population studied and may help in triage.

DIAGNOSTIC DEVICES

Focused assessment with sonography in trauma: a review of concepts and considerations for anesthesiology.

Pace J, Arntfield R

Can J Anaesth. 2018 Apr;65(4):360-370 Dec 4.

ABSTRACT:The use of point-of-care ultrasound in trauma provides diagnostic clarity and routinely influences management. A scanning protocol known as the Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST) has been widely adopted by trauma providers of all specialties. The FAST exam addresses a broad array of pathologic conditions capable of causing instability, including hemoperitoneum, hemopericardium, hemothorax, and pneumothorax. The exam is an integral component to the primary assessment of injured patients and an iconic application of point-of-care ultrasound.This review article aims to summarize the application of the FAST exam with special consideration, where relevant, to anesthesiologists. The scope of the FAST exam, technical considerations, and clinical decision-making in trauma are explored.

Monitoring modalities and assessment of fluid status: A practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Plurad DS, Chiu W, Raja AS, Galvagno SM, Khan U, Kim DY, Tisherman SA, Ward J, Hamill ME, Bennett V, Williams B, Robinson B.

J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018 Jan;84(1):37-49

BACKGROUND: Fluid administration in critically ill surgical patients must be closely monitored to avoid complications. Resuscitation guided by invasive methods are not consistently associated with improved outcomes. As such, there has been increased use of focused ultrasound and Arterial Pulse Waveform Analysis (APWA) to monitor and aid resuscitation. An assessment of these methods using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework is presented.

METHODS: A subsection of the Surgical Critical Care Task Force of the Practice Management Guideline Committee of EAST conducted two systematic reviews to address the use of focused ultrasound and APWA in surgical patients being evaluated for shock. Six population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) questions were generated. Critical outcomes were prediction of fluid responsiveness, reductions in organ failures or complications and mortality. Forest plots were generated for summary data and GRADE methodology was used to assess for quality of the evidence. Reviews are registered in PROSPERO, the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (42015032402 and 42015032530).

RESULTS: Twelve focused ultrasound studies and 20 APWA investigations met inclusion criteria. The appropriateness of focused ultrasound or APWA-based protocols to predict fluid responsiveness varied widely by study groups. Results were mixed in the one focused ultrasound study and 9 APWA studies addressing reductions in organ failures or complications. There was no mortality advantage of either modality versus standard care. Quality of the evidence was considered very low to low across all PICO questions.

CONCLUSION: Focused ultrasound and APWA compare favorably to standard methods of evaluation but only in specific clinical settings. Therefore, conditional recommendations are made for the use of these modalities in surgical patients being evaluated for shock.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review, level II.