qbxbndsl

Property	Value
?:abstract	BACKGROUND: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) could provide a survival benefit to severely injured patients as it may improve their initial ability to survive the hemorrhagic shock. Although the evidence supporting the use of REBOA is not conclusive, its use has expanded worldwide. We aim to compare the management approaches and clinical outcomes of trauma patients treated with REBOA according to the countries’ income based on the World Bank Country and Lending Groups. METHODS: We used data from the AORTA (USA) and the ABOTrauma (multinational) registries. Patients were stratified into two groups: (1) high-income countries (HICs) and (2) low-to-middle income countries (LMICs). Propensity score matching extracted 1:1 matched pairs of subjects who were from an LMIC or a HIC based on age, gender, the presence of pupillary response on admission, impeding hypotension (SBP ≤ 80), trauma mechanism, ISS, the necessity of CPR on arrival, the location of REBOA insertion (emergency room or operating room) and the amount of PRBCs transfused in the first 24 h. Logistic regression (LR) was used to examine the association of LMICs and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 817 trauma patients from 14 countries were included. Blind percutaneous approach and surgical cutdown were the preferred means of femoral cannulation in HICs and LIMCs, respectively. Patients from LMICs had a significantly higher occurrence of MODS and respiratory failure. LR showed no differences in mortality for LMICs when compared to HICs; neither in the non-matched cohort (OR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.36‑1.09; p = 0.1) nor in the matched cohort (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 0.63‑3,33; p = 0.3). CONCLUSION: There is considerable variation in the management practices of REBOA and the outcomes associated with this intervention between HICs and LMICs. Although we found significant differences in multiorgan and respiratory failure rates, there were no differences in the risk-adjusted odds of mortality between the groups analyzed. Trauma surgeons practicing REBOA around the world should joint efforts to standardize the practice of this endovascular technology worldwide.
is ?:annotates of	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/qbxbndsl_hasAnnotation_C0026766> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/qbxbndsl_hasAnnotation_C0036982> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/qbxbndsl_hasAnnotation_C0043251> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/qbxbndsl_hasAnnotation_C1415068> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/qbxbndsl_hasAnnotation_C1537673>
?:creator	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/Manzano-Nunez%2C_Ramiro%3B_McGreevy%2C_David%3B_Orlas%2C_Claudia_P.%3B_Garc%C3%ADa%2C_Alberto_F.%3B_H%C3%B6rer%2C_Tal_M.%3B_DuBose%2C_Joseph%3B_Ordo%C3%B1ez%2C_Carlos_A.>
?:doi	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/10.1186/s13017-020-00337-w>
?:doi	10.1186/s13017-020-00337-w
?:externalLink	<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7549081/>
?:journal	World_J_Emerg_Surg
?:license	cc-by
?:pdf_json_files	document_parses/pdf_json/fcdf0f5946312b60d320f2b97970a451aa4889b0.json
?:pmc_json_files	document_parses/pmc_json/PMC7549081.xml.json
?:pmcid	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/PMC7549081>
?:pmid	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/33046096>
?:pmid	33046096
?:publication_isRelatedTo_Disease	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/COVID-19>
?:sha_id	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/fcdf0f5946312b60d320f2b97970a451aa4889b0>
?:source	PMC
?:title	Outcomes and management approaches of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta based on the income of countries
?:type	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/vocab/Publication>
?:year	2020-10-12

Property

Value

?:abstract

BACKGROUND: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) could provide a survival benefit to severely injured patients as it may improve their initial ability to survive the hemorrhagic shock. Although the evidence supporting the use of REBOA is not conclusive, its use has expanded worldwide. We aim to compare the management approaches and clinical outcomes of trauma patients treated with REBOA according to the countries’ income based on the World Bank Country and Lending Groups. METHODS: We used data from the AORTA (USA) and the ABOTrauma (multinational) registries. Patients were stratified into two groups: (1) high-income countries (HICs) and (2) low-to-middle income countries (LMICs). Propensity score matching extracted 1:1 matched pairs of subjects who were from an LMIC or a HIC based on age, gender, the presence of pupillary response on admission, impeding hypotension (SBP ≤ 80), trauma mechanism, ISS, the necessity of CPR on arrival, the location of REBOA insertion (emergency room or operating room) and the amount of PRBCs transfused in the first 24 h. Logistic regression (LR) was used to examine the association of LMICs and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 817 trauma patients from 14 countries were included. Blind percutaneous approach and surgical cutdown were the preferred means of femoral cannulation in HICs and LIMCs, respectively. Patients from LMICs had a significantly higher occurrence of MODS and respiratory failure. LR showed no differences in mortality for LMICs when compared to HICs; neither in the non-matched cohort (OR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.36‑1.09; p = 0.1) nor in the matched cohort (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 0.63‑3,33; p = 0.3). CONCLUSION: There is considerable variation in the management practices of REBOA and the outcomes associated with this intervention between HICs and LMICs. Although we found significant differences in multiorgan and respiratory failure rates, there were no differences in the risk-adjusted odds of mortality between the groups analyzed. Trauma surgeons practicing REBOA around the world should joint efforts to standardize the practice of this endovascular technology worldwide.

is ?:annotates of