Dataset Information

Selective angioembolization for traumatic renal injuries: a survey on clinician practice.

ABSTRACT: A variety of clinical and imaging findings are used by clinicians to determine utility of renal angioembolization (AE) in managing renal trauma. Our purpose was to investigate specific criteria that clinicians who manage high-grade renal trauma (HGRT) utilize in decision-making for primary or delayed AE.A total of 413 urologists and interventional radiologists (IRs) who practice at level 1 or 2 trauma centers within the United States were provided an original survey via email on experience and opinions regarding the utility of AE for HGRT. We described overall practice patterns and assessed differences by clinician type, using the Fisher's exact test.A total of 79 (20 %) clinicians completed the survey. All clinicians had AE capability for HGRT management. A higher proportion of IRs reported using AE for grade I-II (33 vs. 3 %, p = 0.002), grade III (65 vs. 26 %, p = 0.001), and penetrating injuries (83 vs. 58 %, p = 0.02). A greater proportion of urologists reported using AE for grade V injuries (81 vs. 56 %, p = 0.03). Clinicians most commonly cited computed tomography evidence of active arterial bleeding (97 %), or arteriovenous fistula/pseudoaneurysm (94 %) as indications for primary AE, and 62 % identified concurrent visceral injury as factor that would necessitate surgical intervention.In a survey of clinicians, we report that IRs and urologists utilize AE differently when managing HGRT, as a higher proportion of IRs use AE to manage lower grade as well as penetrating injuries. Validation studies are needed to establish algorithms to identify patients with HGRT who would benefit from selective renal AE.

SUBMITTER: Glass AS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4153381 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Selective angioembolization for traumatic renal injuries: a survey on clinician practice.

Glass Allison S AS Appa Ayesha A AA Kenfield Stacey A SA Bagga Herman S HS Blaschko Sarah D SD McGeady James B JB McAninch Jack W JW Breyer Benjamin N BN

World journal of urology 20130927 3

<h4>Purpose</h4>A variety of clinical and imaging findings are used by clinicians to determine utility of renal angioembolization (AE) in managing renal trauma. Our purpose was to investigate specific criteria that clinicians who manage high-grade renal trauma (HGRT) utilize in decision-making for primary or delayed AE.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 413 urologists and interventional radiologists (IRs) who practice at level 1 or 2 trauma centers within the United States were provided an original surv ...[more]

PMID: 24072011

Similar Datasets

Project description:RationaleLow-Vt ventilation lowers mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) but is underused. Little is known about clinician attitudes toward and perceived barriers to low-Vt ventilation use and their association with actual low-Vt ventilation use.ObjectivesThe objectives of this study were to assess clinicians' attitudes toward and perceived barriers to low-Vt ventilation (Vt <6.5 ml/kg predicted body weight) in patients with ARDS, to identify differences in attitudes and perceived barriers among clinician types, and to compare attitudes toward and perceived barriers to actual low-Vt ventilation use in patients with ARDS.MethodsWe conducted a survey of critical care physicians, nurses, and respiratory therapists at four non-ARDS Network hospitals in the Chicago region. We compared survey responses with performance in a cohort of 362 patients with ARDS.ResultsSurvey responses included clinician attitudes toward and perceived barriers to low-Vt ventilation use. We also measured low-Vt ventilation initiation by these clinicians in 347 patients with ARDS initiated after ARDS onset as well as correlation with clinician attitudes and perceived barriers. Of 674 clinicians surveyed, 467 (69.3%) responded. Clinicians had positive attitudes toward and perceived few process barriers to ARDS diagnosis or initiation of low-Vt ventilation. Physicians had more positive attitudes and perceived fewer barriers than nurses or respiratory therapists. However, use of low-Vt ventilation by all three clinician groups was low. For example, whereas physicians believed that 92.5% of their patients with ARDS warranted treatment with low-Vt ventilation, they initiated low-Vt ventilation for a median (interquartile range) of 7.4% (0 to 14.3%) of their eligible patients with ARDS. Clinician attitudes and perceived barriers were not correlated with low-Vt ventilation initiation.ConclusionsClinicians had positive attitudes toward low-Vt ventilation and perceived few barriers to using it, but attitudes and perceived process barriers were not correlated with actual low-Vt ventilation use, which was low. Implementation strategies should be focused on examining other issues, such as ARDS recognition and process solutions, to improve low-Vt ventilation use.

Project description:BackgroundExtravasation injuries are caused by unintended leakages of fluids or medicines from intravenous lines but there is no consensus on the best treatment approaches, particularly in infants and young children.MethodsThis paper presents a more succinct account of a study of treatments for extravasation injuries in infants and children which has also been reported in full as an NIHR HTA report. A systematic scoping review and survey of UK NHS practice were undertaken. Twelve databases - including MEDLINE and EMBASE - were searched for relevant studies in February 2017. Studies of children with extravasation injuries receiving any treatment for extravasation injury were eligible, providing they reported one of the following outcomes: wound healing time, infection, pain, scarring, functional impairment, and requirement for surgery. Studies were screened in duplicate. Data were extracted by one researcher and checked by another. Studies were summarised narratively. An online questionnaire was distributed to NHS staff at neonatal units, paediatric intensive care units and principal oncology/haematology units.ResultsThe evidence identified in the scoping review was mostly comprised of small, retrospective, uncontrolled group studies or case reports. The studies covered a wide range of interventions including conservative management approaches, saline flush-out techniques (with or without prior hyaluronidase), hyaluronidase without flush-out, artificial skin treatments, debridement and plastic surgery. Few studies graded injury severity and the results sections and outcomes reported in most studies were limited. There was heterogeneity across study populations in many factors. The survey yielded 63 responses from hospital units across the UK. Results indicated that although most units had written documentation for treating extravasation injuries, only one-third of documents included a system for grading injury severity. The most frequently used interventions were elevation of the affected area and analgesics. Saline wash-out treatments, either with or without hyaluronidase, were regularly used in about half of all neonatal units. Most responders thought a randomised controlled trial might be a viable future research design.ConclusionsThere is some uncertainty about which are most the promising treatments for extravasation injuries in infants and young children. Saline flush-out techniques and conservative management approaches are commonly used and may be suitable for evaluation in trials. Although conventional randomised trials may be difficult to perform a randomised registry trial may be an appropriate alternative design.

Project description:OBJECTIVE Minimal aortic injuries (MAIs) are being recognized more frequently due to the increasing use of high-resolution diagnostic techniques. The objective of this case series review was to report the clinical and radiological characteristics and outcomes of a series of patients with MAI. METHODS From January 2000 to December 2011, 54 major blunt trauma patients were admitted to our institution with traumatic aortic injuries. Nine of them presented with MAI, whereas the remaining 45 patients suffered a significant aortic injury (SAI). RESULTS MAIs accounted for 17% of the overall traumatic aortic injuries in our series. Major trauma patients with MAI and SAI were similar regarding the presence of severe associated non-aortic injuries and the expected mortality calculated by injury severity score, revised trauma score and trauma injury severity score. There were no statistically significant differences in in-hospital mortality between MAI (22.2%) and SAI (30.2%). No death in the MAI group was aortic related, whereas five deaths in the SAI group were caused by an aortic complication. The survival of MAI patients was 77.8% at 1 and 5 years. There was no late mortality among MAI patients. The survival of SAI patients was 69.7% at 1 year and 63.6% at 5 and 10 years. None of the seven surviving patients with MAI presented a progression of the aortic injury. In six patients, the intimal tear completely healed in imaging controls, whereas one patient developed a small saccular pseudoaneurysm. CONCLUSIONS Blunt traumas presenting MAI are as severe as traumas that associate SAI and present similar in-hospital mortality. In contrast to SAI traumas, in-hospital mortality due to MAI is not usually related to the aortic injury, so these injuries are more amenable to a conservative management. It is mandatory to perform a close imaging surveillance to detect early any potential adverse evolution of an MAI. Nevertheless, a balance must be struck between a close serial imaging surveillance and the potentially detrimental effects of obtaining high-resolution additional images.

Dataset Information

Selective angioembolization for traumatic renal injuries: a survey on clinician practice.

Publications

Selective angioembolization for traumatic renal injuries: a survey on clinician practice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets