Background Resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is performed in severe trauma cases as a final lifesaving effort. Prominent, yet differing, practice management guidelines exist from Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) and Western Trauma Association (WTA). This study evaluates all RTs performed from 2012 to 2019 at an urban Level 1 trauma center for management guideline indication and subsequent outcomes. Methods Our trauma registry was queried to identify RT cases from 2012 to 2019. Data was collected on patient demographics, prehospital presentation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) requirements, and resuscitation provided. Survival to the operating room, intensive care unit, and overall were recorded. Information was compared with regard to EAST and WTA criteria. Results Eighty-seven patients who underwent RTs were included. WTA guidelines were met in 78/87 (89.7%) of cases, comparatively EAST guidelines were met in every case. Within the EAST criteria, conditional and strong recommendations were met in 70/87 (80.4%) and 17/87 (19.5%) of cases, respectively. In nine cases (10.3%) indications were discordant, each meeting conditional indication by EAST and no indication by WTA. All patients that survived to the operating room (OR), ICU admission, and overall met EAST criteria. Conclusion All RTs performed at our Level 1 trauma center met indications provided by EAST criteria. WTA guidelines were not applicable in nine salvaging encounters due to the protracted duration of CPR before proceeding to RT. Furthermore, more patients that survived to OR and ICU admission met EAST guidelines suggesting an improved potential for patient survivability. As increased data is derived, management guidelines will likely be re-established for optimized patient outcomes.
Keywords: blunt thoracic trauma; penetrating thoracic trauma; resuscitative thoracotomy; trauma management; trauma.
Copyright © 2024, Godbole et al.