Matthew M. Carrick

BACKGROUND: Since the patient's skin is a major source of pathogens that cause surgical-site infection, optimization of preoperative skin antisepsis may decrease postoperative infections. We hypothesized that preoperative skin cleansing with chlorhexidine-alcohol is more protective against infection than is povidone-iodine. METHODS: We randomly assigned adults undergoing clean-contaminated surgery in six hospitals to preoperative skin preparation with either chlorhexidine-alcohol scrub or povidone-iodine scrub and paint. The primary outcome was any surgical-site infection within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included individual types of surgical-site infections. RESULTS: A total of 849 subjects (409 in the chlorhexidine-alcohol group and 440 in the povidone-iodine group) qualified for the intention-to-treat analysis. The overall rate of surgical-site infection was significantly lower in the chlorhexidine-alcohol group than in the povidone-iodine group (9.5% vs. 16.1%; P=0.004; relative risk, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.85). Chlorhexidine-alcohol was significantly more protective than povidone-iodine against both superficial incisional infections (4.2% vs. 8.6%, P=0.008) and deep incisional infections (1% vs. 3%, P=0.05) but not against organ-space infections (4.4% vs. 4.5%). Similar results were observed in the per-protocol analysis of the 813 patients who remained in the study during the 30-day follow-up period. Adverse events were similar in the two study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative cleansing of the patient's skin with chlorhexidine-alcohol is superior to cleansing with povidone-iodine for preventing surgical-site infection after clean-contaminated surgery. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00290290.)

BACKGROUND: Trauma is a leading cause of death worldwide and is thus a major public health concern. Previous studies have shown that limiting the amount of fluids given by following a strategy of permissive hypotension during the initial resuscitation period may improve trauma outcomes. This study examines the clinical outcomes from the first 90 patients enrolled in a prospective, randomized controlled trial of hypotensive resuscitation, with the primary aim of assessing the effects of a limited transfusion and intravenous (IV) fluid strategy on 30-day morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Patients in hemorrhagic shock who required emergent surgery were randomized to one of the two arms of the study for intraoperative resuscitation. Those in the experimental (low mean arterial pressure [LMAP]) arm were managed with a hypotensive resuscitation strategy in which the target mean arterial pressure (MAP) was 50 mm Hg. Those in the control (high MAP [HMAP]) arm were managed with standard fluid resuscitation to a target MAP of 65 mm Hg. Patients were followed up for 30 days. Intraoperative fluid requirements, mortality, postoperative complications, and other clinical data were prospectively gathered and analyzed. RESULTS: Patients in the LMAP group received a significantly less blood products and total i.v. fluids during intraoperative resuscitation than those in the HMAP group. They had significantly lower mortality in the early postoperative period and a nonsignificant trend for lower mortality at 30 days. Patients in the LMAP group were significantly less likely to develop immediate postoperative coagulopathy and less likely to die from postoperatively bleeding associated with coagulopathy. Among those who developed coagulopathy in both groups, patients in the LMAP group had significantly lower international normalized ratio than those in the HMAP group, indicating a less severe coagulopathy. CONCLUSIONS: Hypotensive resuscitation is a safe strategy for use in the trauma population and results in a significant reduction in blood product transfusions and overall IV fluid administration. Specifically, resuscitating patients with the intent of maintaining a target minimum MAP of 50 mm Hg, rather than 65 mm Hg, significantly decreases postoperative coagulopathy and lowers the risk of early postoperative death and coagulopathy. These preliminary results provide convincing evidence that support the continued investigation and use of hypotensive resuscitation in the trauma setting.

BACKGROUND: Patients with moderate and severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) are at risk for secondary brain insults such as thrombocytopenia and coagulopathy. This study assessed the development of thrombocytopenia and coagulopathy at admission and within the subsequent 72 hours after TBI. METHODS: Blunt trauma patients with moderate or severe TBI and an extracranial Abbreviated Injury Scale score less than 3 were reviewed. Data collection included initial and subsequent prothrombin time, partial thromboplastin time, and platelet values. RESULTS: On initial evaluation, thrombocytopenia was present in 14% and coagulopathy in 21% of patients. By the third day, thrombocytopenia and coagulopathy increased to 46% and 41%, respectively. Of patients who died, 67% had thrombocytopenia and 62% had coagulopathy. CONCLUSION: Patients with moderate and severe TBI are at risk for thrombocytopenia and coagulopathy, not only at admission but also on subsequent laboratory examination. Repeat laboratory evaluation is warranted even if initial results are normal in this population.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to determine the suitability of low-grade pancreatic injuries for nonoperative management have been hindered by the inaccuracy of older computed tomography (CT) technology for detecting pancreatic injury (PI). This retrospective, multicenter American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-sponsored trial examined the sensitivity of newer 16- and 64-multidetector CT (MDCT) for detecting PI, and sensitivity/specificity for the identification of pancreatic ductal injury (PDI). METHODS: Patients who received a preoperative 16- or 64-MDCT followed by laparotomy with a documented PI were enrolled. Preoperative MDCT scans were classified as indicating the presence (+) or absence (-) of PI and PDI. Operative notes were reviewed and all patients were confirmed as PI (+), and then classified as PDI (+) or (-). As all patients had PI, an analysis of PI specificity was not possible. PI patients formed the pool for further PDI analysis. As sensitivity and specificity data were available for PDI, multivariate logistic regression was performed for PDI patients using the presence or absence of agreement between CT and operative note findings as an independent variable. Covariates were age, gender, Injury Severity Score, mechanism of injury, presence of oral contrast, presence of other abdominal injuries, performance of the scan as part of a dedicated pancreas protocol, and image thickness < or =3 mm or > or =5 mm. RESULTS: Twenty centers enrolled 206 PI patients, including 71 PDI (+) patients. Intravenous contrast was used in 203 studies; 69 studies used presence of oral contrast. Eight-nine percent were blunt mechanisms, and 96% were able to have their duct status operatively classified as PDI (+) or (-). The sensitivity of 16-MDCT for all PI was 60.1%, whereas 64-MDCT was 47.2%. For PDI, the sensitivities of 16- and 64-MDCT were 54.0% and 52.4%, respectively, with specificities of 94.8% for 16-MDCT scanners and 90.3% for 64-MDCT scanners. Logistic regression showed that no covariates were associated with an increased likelihood of detecting PDI for either 16- or 64-MDCT scanners. The area under the curve was 0.66 for the 16-MDCT PDI analysis and 0.77 for the 64-MDCT PDI analysis. CONCLUSION: Sixteen and 64-MDCT have low sensitivity for detecting PI and PDI, while exhibiting a high specificity for PDI. Their use as decision-making tools for the nonoperative management of PI are, therefore, limited.