Simultaneous versus rapid serial interventions in a hybrid operating suite for severely injured patients: a prospective evaluation of differences in RAPTOR techniques and outcomes

Abstract

Background: Open surgical and percutaneous endovascular procedures aimed at arresting traumatic life-threatening hemorrhage are usually performed in rapid serial fashion by surgeons and interventional radiologists; truly simultaneous procedures require modifications in technique, workflow and team collaboration. The primary objective of this study was to prospectively audit outcomes in patients with ongoing hemorrhage who underwent truly simultaneous open and percutaneous procedures. Methods: We prospectively evaluated the cases of all severely injured patients who required an open and percutaneous procedure within the hybrid RAPTOR (resuscitation with angiography, percutaneous techniques and operative repair) suite at the Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, between Apr. 4, 2013, and Dec. 5, 2019. We compared outcomes between the truly simultaneous and rapid serial cases. Results: Thirty-five patients (31 [89%] male, median age 46 yr, median Injury Severity Score 30, blunt mechanism in 26 cases [74%]) underwent a hybrid intervention in the RAPTOR suite to stop ongoing hemorrhage during the study period. Twenty-three patients (66%) had a rapid serial procedure, and 12 (34%) had a truly simultaneous procedure. Demographic characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Compared to the rapid serial group, a higher proportion of patients in the truly simultaneous group were hemodynamically unstable (11 [92%] v. 13 [56%], p = 0.03) and required damage-control procedures (10 [83%] v. 12 [52%], p = 0.03). The time from hospital arrival to procedure initiation was shorter for the truly simultaneous group (mean 31 min v. 59 min, p = 0.02), and a lower proportion had initial radiologic studies (3 [25%] v. 16 [70%], p = 0.01). The median hospital length of stay, intensive care unit stay and mortality rate were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Truly simultaneous open and percutaneous procedures to stop ongoing hemorrhage were unique in both patient and procedural details. For the most severely injured patients, the provision of truly simultaneous modalities is necessary to achieve clinical outcomes equivalent to those of less ill patients.