Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorGodø, Bård Neuenkirchen
dc.contributor.authorBrede, Jostein Rodseth
dc.contributor.authorKrüger, Andreas Jorstad
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-05T06:44:07Z
dc.date.available2022-04-05T06:44:07Z
dc.date.created2021-06-06T08:30:31Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationEmergency Medicine Journal. 2021, 26 1-6.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1472-0205
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2989749
dc.description.abstractBackground Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) can be used as an adjunct treatment in traumatic abdominopelvic haemorrhage, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms, postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), gastrointestinal bleeding and iatrogenic injuries during surgery. This needs assessment study aims to determine the number of patients eligible for REBOA in a typical Norwegian population. Methods This was a retrospective cross-sectional study based on data obtained from blood bank registries and the Norwegian Trauma Registry for the years 2017–2018. Patients who received ≥4 units of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) within 6 hours and met the anatomical criteria for REBOA or patients with relevant Abbreviated Injury Scale codes with concurrent hypotension or transfusion of ≥4 units of PRBCs within 6 hours were identified. A detailed two-step chart review was performed to identify potentially eligible REBOA candidates. Descriptive data were collected and compared between subgroups using non-parametric tests for statistical significance. Results Of 804 patients eligible for inclusion, 53 patients were regarded as potentially REBOA eligible (corresponding to 5.7 per 100 000 adult population/year). Of these, 19 actually received REBOA. Among the identified eligible patients, 44 (83%) had a non-traumatic aetiology. Forty-two patients (79%) were treated at a tertiary care hospital. Fourteen (78%) of the REBOA procedures were due to PPH. Conclusion The number of patients potentially eligible for REBOA after haemorrhage is low, and most cases are non-traumatic. Most patients were treated at a tertiary care hospital. The exclusion of non-traumatic patients results in a substantial underestimation of the number of potentially REBOA-eligible patients.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Groupen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleNeeds assessment of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in patients with major haemorrhage: A cross-sectional studyen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.source.pagenumber1-6en_US
dc.source.volume26en_US
dc.source.journalEmergency Medicine Journalen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/emermed-2020-210808
dc.identifier.cristin1913925
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal