2013•The American SurgeonRequires access

Emergency Department Thoracotomy: Too Little, Too Much, or Too Late

Allan Capote, Andrew Michael, Jorge L. Almodovar, Patricia Chan, Ruby A. Skinner, Maureen Martin

Open publisher page 26 citations

Abstract

Emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) is a dramatic lifesaving procedure demanding timely surgical intervention, technical expertise, and coordinated resuscitation efforts. Inappropriate use is costly and futile. All patients admitted to a Level II trauma center who underwent EDT from January 2003 to July 2012 were studied. The primary end point was appropriateness of EDT. Secondary end points were staff exposure, survival, and return to normal function. Eighty-seven patients including 59 patients with penetrating wounds had a mean loss of vital signs (LOV) 11.6 ±10.6 minutes and Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 45.8 ± 16.1, whereas 28 blunt injury patients had a mean LOV of 10.4 ± 11.5 minutes and ISS of 50.4 ± 19.4. Mortality was 81 per cent (48 of 59) in penetrating injury and 93 per cent (26 of 28) in blunt injury patients, respectively (odds ratio [OR] 2.99; P 0.21). Fifty-five EDTs were indicated with 10 survivors (18.2%) and 32 not indicated with three survivors (9.4%). Surgeons adhered to guidelines more compared with ED physicians (OR, 4.9; P = 0.03) whose patients were more likely to die (OR, 3.52; P = 0.124). Survivors (11 of 13 [84.6%]) were discharged home without significant long-term neurologic disability. EDT is lifesaving when performed for penetrating injury by experienced surgeons following established guidelines but futile in blunt injury or when performed by nonsurgeons regardless of mechanism.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) is a dramatic lifesaving procedure demanding timely surgical intervention, technical expertise, and coordinated resuscitation efforts. Inappropriate use is costly and futile. All patients admitted to a Level II trauma center who underwent EDT from January 2003 to July 2012 were studied. The primary end point was appropriateness of EDT. Secondary end points were staff exposure, survival, and return to normal function. Eighty-seven patients including 59 patients with penetrating wounds had a mean loss of vital signs (LOV) 11.6 ±10.6 minutes and Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 45.8 ± 16.1, whereas 28 blunt injury patients had a mean LOV of 10.4 ± 11.5 minutes and ISS of 50.4 ± 19.4. Mortality was 81 per cent (48 of 59) in penetrating injury and 93 per cent (26 of 28) in blunt injury patients, respectively (odds ratio [OR] 2.99; P 0.21). Fifty-five EDTs were indicated with 10 survivors (18.2%) and 32 not indicated with three survivors (9.4%). Surgeons adhered to guidelines more compared with ED physicians (OR, 4.9; P = 0.03) whose patients were more likely to die (OR, 3.52; P = 0.124). Survivors (11 of 13 [84.6%]) were discharged home without significant long-term neurologic disability. EDT is lifesaving when performed for penetrating injury by experienced surgeons following established guidelines but futile in blunt injury or when performed by nonsurgeons regardless of mechanism.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 26 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) is a dramatic lifesaving procedure demanding timely surgical intervention, technical expertise, and coordinated resuscitation efforts. Inappropriate use is costly and futile. All patients admitted to a Level II trauma center who underwent EDT from January 2003 to July 2012 were studied. The primary end point was appropriateness of EDT. Secondary end points were staff exposure, survival, and return to normal function. Eighty-seven patients including 59 patients with penetrating wounds had a mean loss of vital signs (LOV) 11.6 ±10.6 minutes and Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 45.8 ± 16.1, whereas 28 blunt injury patients had a mean LOV of 10.4 ± 11.5 minutes and ISS of 50.4 ± 19.4. Mortality was 81 per cent (48 of 59) in penetrating injury and 93 per cent (26 of 28) in blunt injury patients, respectively (odds ratio [OR] 2.99; P 0.21). Fifty-five EDTs were indicated with 10 survivors (18.2%) and 32 not indicated with three survivors (9.4%). Surgeons adhered to guidelines more compared with ED physicians (OR, 4.9; P = 0.03) whose patients were more likely to die (OR, 3.52; P = 0.124). Survivors (11 of 13 [84.6%]) were discharged home without significant long-term neurologic disability. EDT is lifesaving when performed for penetrating injury by experienced surgeons following established guidelines but futile in blunt injury or when performed by nonsurgeons regardless of mechanism.

Key concepts: Medicine, Thoracotomy, Emergency department, Blunt, Injury Severity Score, Trauma center, Surgery, Penetrating trauma

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Emergency Department Thoracotomy: Too Little, Too Much, or Too Late — Research Paper | ScholarLens