Numerous in-hospital scoring systems to activate massive transfusion protocols (MTP) have been proposed; however, to date, pre-hospital scoring systems have not been robustly validated. Many trauma ...centers do not have blood or pre-thawed plasma available in the trauma bay, leading to delays in balanced transfusion. This study aims to assess pre-hospital injury and physiologic parameters to develop a pre-hospital scoring system predictive of need for massive transfusion (MT) prior to patient arrival.
A retrospective review of all adult full and partial trauma team activations from July 2014–July 2018 from an urban level 2 trauma center was performed utilizing our trauma registry. Stepwise logistic regression analysis was performed to develop a new scoring system, with point totals assigned proportional to the odds ratios of requiring MT for each variable. Internal validation of the EMS-G score was performed using a subset of the data which was not utilized for development of the scoring system, and sensitivity and specificity were compared to previously validated in-hospital scoring systems applied in the pre-hospital setting.
763 patients were included with 94 patients (12.3%) receiving early MT, defined as 4 units pRBC in 4 h or ED death. In-hospital models for predicting MT such as Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC) or Shock Index (SI) have sensitivities and specificities of 46/85% and 94/79% respectively for early MTP utilization based on pre-hospital data. Pre-hospital variables found to be predictive of MT were used to develop the EMS-G (Extremity, Mechanism, Shock Index, GCS) score. This system assigns obvious extremity injury–1-point, penetrating mechanism −2 points, shock index ≥0.9–2 points, GCS ≤8–3 points. A score of 3 or greater was chosen to maximize sensitivity and specificity for pre-hospital MT activation. EMS-G score based on pre-hospital report is 89% sensitive, 84% specific, with a PPV of 44% and NPV of 98% for early MT. Using this system, 25% of full and partial trauma team activations met criteria for pre-hospital MTP activation.
The EMS-G Score has increased sensitivity and specificity compared to the ABC Score in the pre-hospital setting and appears more appropriate than shock index alone at predicting massive transfusion. This scoring system allows trauma centers to activate MTP prior to patient arrival to ensure early and appropriate blood product administration without blood product wastage.
•The EMS-G score predicts patients who may require massive transfusion prior to hospital arrival.•Only variables obtained in the pre-hospital setting were used to develop the scoring system.•The EMS-G Score appears more accurate in predicting massive transfusion needs than the ABC Score or Shock Index.
PURPOSEBleeding is a well-known risk of percutaneous breast biopsy, frequently controlled with manual pressure. However, significant bleeding complications may require further evaluation or ...intervention. Our objectives were to assess the rate, type, and periprocedural management of significant bleeding following percutaneous breast biopsy and to evaluate the success of any interventions.METHODSWe retrospectively reviewed percutaneous breast biopsies at our institution over a 10-year period with documented post-biopsy bleeding complications in radiology reports. Patients were included if bleeding required intervention (interventional radiology IR, surgery, or other), imaging follow-up, or clinical evaluation for symptoms. Additional data included patient demographics, anticoagulation, history of bleeding diathesis, biopsy details, bleeding symptoms, histopathology, and intervention details, if applicable.RESULTSOf 5820 unique patients who underwent percutaneous biopsy, 66 patients (66/5820; 1.1%) comprising 71 biopsy cases met inclusion for clinically significant bleeding with 5/71(7.0%) requiring surgery, 9/71(12.7%) requiring IR intervention, and 57/71(80.3%) requiring lower-acuity intervention including prolonged observation (5/57;7.0%), overnight admission (4/57;5.6%), aspiration (4/57;5.6%), lidocaine and suture (2/57;2.8%), primary care visit (7/57;10.0%), blood transfusion (1/57;1.4%), emergency room visit (6/57;8.5%), surgery consult (8/57;11.3%), IR consult (2/57;2.8%), and follow-up imaging (22/57;31.0%). Most patients requiring intervention by surgery or IR had acute signs of bleeding immediately after biopsy while most patients with delayed signs of bleeding required lower-acuity interventions.CONCLUSIONClinically significant bleeding is extremely rare after percutaneous breast biopsy and is most often managed non-surgically. Developing an institutional algorithm for management of bleeding complications that consults IR before surgery may help decrease the number of patients managed surgically.
