Google Analytics Alternative

Ok

En poursuivant votre navigation sur ce site, vous acceptez l'utilisation de cookies. Ces derniers assurent le bon fonctionnement de nos services. En savoir plus.

22/06/2013

Low flow mais pas zero flow resuscitation

remplissage,perfusion

Hampton D. et all. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74: S9-S15

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BACKGROUND:

Delivery of intravenous crystalloid fluids (IVF) remains a tradition-based priority during prehospital resuscitation of trauma patients. Hypotensive and targeted resuscitation algorithms have been shown to improve patient outcomes. We hypothesized that receiving any prehospital IVF is associated with increased survival in trauma patients compared with receiving no prehospital IVF.

METHODS:

Prospective data from 10 Level 1 trauma centers were collected. Patient demographics, prehospital IVF volume, prehospita and emergency department vital signs, lifesaving interventions, laboratory values, outcomes, and complications were collected and analyzed. Patients who did or did not receive prehospital IVF were compared. Tests for nonparametric data wer used to assess significant differences between groups (p e 0.05). Cox regression analyses were performed to determine the independent influence of IVF on outcome and complications.

RESULTS:

The study population consisted of 1,245 trauma patients; 45 were excluded owing to incomplete data; 84% (n = 1,009) received prehospital IVF, and 16% (n = 191) did not. There was no difference between the groups with respect to sex, age, and Injury Severity Score (ISS). The on-scene systolic blood pressure was lower in the IVF group (110 mm Hg vs. 100 mm Hg, p G 0.04) and did not change significantly after IVF, measured at emergency department admission (110 mm Hg vs. 105 mm Hg, p = 0.05). Hematocrit/hemoglobin, fibrinogen, and platelets were lower (p G 0.05), and prothrombin time/ international normalized ratio and partial thromboplastin time were higher (p G 0.001) in the IVF group. The IVF group received a median fluid volume of 700 mL (interquartile range, 300Y1,300). The Cox regression revealed that prehospital fluid administration was associated with increased survival (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.72Y0.98; p = 0.03). Site differences in ISS and fluid volumes were demonstrated (p G 0.001).

CONCLUSION:

Prehospital IVF volumes commonly used by PRospective Observational Multicenter Massive Transfusion Study (PROMMTT) investigators do not result in increased systolic blood pressure but are associated with decreased in-hospital mortality in trauma patients compared with patients who did not receive prehospital IVF

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C'est du moins ce que conclue ce travail qui porte sur l'administration préhospitalière de cristalloïdes dans le cadre de conditionnements qui apparaissent assez proche de notre pratique. Ces résultats interpellent cependant car prenant apparemment le contrepied d'une autre publication récente lisible ici.

Comme dans tout restons mesurés comme proposé par ce consensus  US

1. Patients porteur de plaies supérficielles: Pas d'abord veineux immédiat

2. Patient cohérent avec pouls radial: Verrou salé

3. Patient incohérent ou pas e pouls radial: Abord veineux et apport d'un volume de 500 ml

[ATTENTION AUX HEA AU SUJET DESQUELS LA CONTROVERSE S'ACCENTUE]

4. Répéter l'administration si pas d'effet 

5. Si trauma cranien obtenir une PAS > 90 mmHg


L'objectif n'est pas de restaurer une pression artérielle normale mais de maintenir une pression de perfusion compatible avec la survie jusqu'à la prise en charge par une équipe chirurgicale.

Les commentaires sont fermés.