PLP: A ne pas mettre au rebus !

Contemporary utility of diagnostic peritoneal aspiration in trauma
Morgan Schellenberg M et Al. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2021 Nov 1;91(5):814-819.

Background: Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) has supplanted diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL) as the preferred bedside evaluation for traumatic hemoperitoneum. Diagnostic peritoneal aspiration (DPA) is a simpler, faster modification of DPL with an unclear role in contemporary practice. This study delineated modern roles for DPA and defined its diagnostic yield.

Methods: All trauma patients presenting to our Level I center who underwent DPA were included (May 2015 to May 2020). Demographics, comorbidities, clinical/injury data, and outcomes were collected. The diagnostic yield and accuracy of DPA were calculated against the criterion standard of hemoperitoneum at exploratory laparotomy or computed tomography scan.

Results: In total, 41 patients underwent DPA, typically after blunt trauma (n = 37, 90%). Patients were almost exclusively hypotensive (n = 20, 49%) or in arrest (n = 18, 44%). Most patients had an equivocal or negative FAST and hypotension or return of spontaneous circulation after resuscitative thoracotomy (n = 32, 78%); or had a positive FAST and known cirrhosis (n = 4, 10%). In two (5%) patients, one obese, the catheter failed to access the peritoneal cavity. Diagnostic peritoneal aspiration sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 80%, 100%, 100%, and 90%, with an accuracy of 93%. One (2%) complication, a small bowel injury, occurred.

Conclusion: Despite near ubiquitous FAST availability, DPA remains important in diagnosing or excluding hemoperitoneum with exceedingly low rates of failure and complications. Diagnostic peritoneal aspiration is most conclusive when positive, without false positives in this study. Diagnostic peritoneal aspiration was most used among blunt hypotensive or postarrest patients who had an equivocal or negative FAST, in whom the preliminary diagnosis of hemoperitoneum is a critically important decision making branch point.

Décompression thoracique: 7 cm !

Prehospital Decompression of Pneumothorax: A Systematic Review of Recent Evidence
Robitaille-Fortin M et Al. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2021 Aug;36(4):450-459.

Introduction:

Pneumothorax remains an important cause of preventable trauma death. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the recent evidence on the efficacy, patient outcomes, and adverse events of different chest decompression approaches relevant to the out-of-hospital setting.

Methods:

A comprehensive literature search was performed using five databases (from January 1, 2014 through June 15, 2020). To be considered eligible, studies required to report original data on decompression of suspected or proven traumatic pneumothorax and be considered relevant to the prehospital context. They also required to be conducted mostly on an adult population (expected more than ≥80% of the population ≥16 years old) of patients. Needle chest decompression (NCD), finger thoracostomy (FT), and tube thoracostomy were considered. No meta-analysis was performed. Level of evidence was assigned using the Harbour and Miller system.

Results:

A total of 1,420 citations were obtained by the search strategy, of which 20 studies were included. Overall, the level of evidence was low. Eleven studies reported on the efficacy and patient outcomes following chest decompression. The most studied technique was NCD (n = 7), followed by FT (n = 5). Definitions of a successful chest decompression were heterogeneous. Subjective improvement following NCD ranged between 18% and 86% (n = 6). Successful FT was reported for between 9.7% and 32.0% of interventions following a traumatic cardiac arrest. Adverse events were infrequently reported. Nine studies presented only on anatomical measures with predicted failure and success. The mean anterior chest wall thickness (CWT) was larger than the lateral CWT in all studies except one. The predicted success rate of NCD ranged between 90% and 100% when using needle >7cm (n = 7) both for the lateral and anterior approaches. The reported risk of iatrogenic injuries was higher for the lateral approach, mostly on the left side because of the proximity with the heart.

Conclusions:

Based on observational studies with a low level of evidence, prehospital NCD should be performed using a needle >7cm length with either a lateral or anterior approach. While FT is an interesting diagnostic and therapeutic approach, evidence on the success rates and complications is limited. High-quality studies are required to determine the optimal chest decompression approach applicable in the out-of-hospital setting.

Leçon inaugurale EVDG 2018

Clic ici pour ouvrir le document