A meta-analysis of the incidence of complications associated with groin access after the use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in trauma patients

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Serious complications related to groin access have been reported with the use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the incidence of complications related to groin access from the use of REBOA in adult trauma patients.

METHODS

We identified articles in MEDLINE and EMBASE. We reviewed all studies that involved adult trauma patients who underwent the placement of a REBOA and included only those that reported the incidence of complications related to groin access. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed.

RESULTS

We identified 13 studies with a total of 424 patients. REBOA was inserted most commonly by trauma surgeons or emergency room physicians. Information regarding puncture technique was reported in 12 studies and was available for a total of 414 patients. Percutaneous access and surgical cutdown were performed in 304 (73.4%) and 110 (26.5%) patients, respectively. Overall, complications related to groin access occurred in 5.6% of patients (n = 24/424). Lower limb amputation was required in 2.1% of patients (9/424), of which three cases (3/424 [0.7%]) were directly related to the vascular puncture from the REBOA insertion. A meta-analysis that used the logit transformation showed a 5% (95% CI 3%–9%) incidence of complications without significant heterogeneity (LR test: χ2 = 0.73, p = 0.2, Tau-square = 0.2). In a second meta-analysis, we used the Freeman–Tukey double arcsine transformation and found an incidence of complications of 4% (95% CI 2%–7%) with low heterogeneity (I2 = 16.3%).

CONCLUSION

We found that the incidence of complications related to groin access was of 4–5% based on a meta-analysis of 13 studies published worldwide. Currently, there are no benchmarks or quality measures as a reference to compare, and thus, further work is required to identify these benchmarks and improve the practice of REBOA in trauma surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles