Proposed revision of the American Association for Surgery of Trauma Renal Organ Injury Scale: Secondary analysis of the Multi-institutional Genitourinary Trauma Study

Author:

Matta Rano,Keihani Sorena,Hebert Kevin J.,Horns Joshua J.,Nirula Raminder,McCrum Marta L.,McCormick Benjamin J.,Gross Joel A.,Joyce Ryan P.,Rogers Douglas M.,Wang Sherry S.,Hagedorn Judith C.,Selph J. Patrick,Sensenig Rachel L.,Moses Rachel A.,Dodgion Christopher M.,Gupta Shubham,Mukherjee Kaushik,Majercik Sarah,Broghammer Joshua A.,Schwartz Ian,Elliott Sean P.,Breyer Benjamin N.,Baradaran Nima,Zakaluzny Scott,Erickson Bradley A.,Miller Brandi D.,Askari Reza,Carrick Matthew M.,Burks Frank N.,Norwood Scott,Myers Jeremy B.,

Abstract

BACKGROUND This study updates the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Organ Injury Scale (OIS) for renal trauma using evidence-based criteria for bleeding control intervention. METHODS This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter retrospective study including patients with high-grade renal trauma from seven level 1 trauma centers from 2013 to 2018. All eligible patients were assigned new renal trauma grades based on revised criteria. The primary outcome used to measure injury severity was intervention for renal bleeding. Secondary outcomes included intervention for urinary extravasation, units of packed red blood cells transfused within 24 hours, and mortality. To test the revised grading system, we performed mixed-effect logistic regression adjusted for multiple baseline demographic and trauma covariates. We determined the area under the curve (AUC) to assess accuracy of predicting bleeding interventions from the revised grading system and compared this to 2018 AAST OIS. RESULTS Based on the 2018 OIS grading system, we included 549 patients with AAST grades III to V injuries and computed tomography scans (III, 52% [n = 284]; IV, 45% [n = 249]; and V, 3% [n = 16]). Among these patients, 89% experienced blunt injury (n = 491), and 12% (n = 64) underwent intervention for bleeding. After applying the revised grading criteria, 60% (n = 329) of patients were downgraded, and 4% (n = 23) were upgraded; 2.8% (n = 7) downgraded from grade V to IV, and 69.5% (n = 173) downgraded from grade IV to III. The revised renal trauma grading system demonstrated improved predictive ability for bleeding interventions (2018 AUC, 0.805; revised AUC, 0.883; p = 0.001) and number of units of packed red blood cells transfused. When we removed urinary injury from the revised system, there was no difference in its predictive ability for renal hemorrhage intervention. CONCLUSION A revised renal trauma grading system better delineates the need for hemostatic interventions than the current AAST OIS renal trauma grading system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic Test/Criteria; Level III.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3