Author:
Gurney Jennifer M.,Kotwal Russ S.,Holcomb John B.,Staudt Amanda M.,Eastridge Brian,Sirkin Max,Jensen Shane,Shackelford Stacy,Sonka Brian J.,Wilson Justin,Montgomery Harold,Gross Kirby,Warren Wendy,Mazuchowski Edward,Rohrer Andrew J.
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Mortality reviews examine US military fatalities resulting from traumatic injuries during combat operations. These reviews are essential to the evolution of the military trauma system to improve individual, unit, and system-level trauma care delivery and inform trauma system protocols and guidelines. This study identifies specific prehospital and hospital interventions with the potential to provide survival benefits.
METHODS
US Special Operations Command fatalities with battle injuries deemed potentially survivable (2001–2021) were extracted from previous mortality reviews. A military trauma review panel consisting of trauma surgeons, forensic pathologists, and prehospital and emergency medicine specialists conducted a methodical review to identify prehospital, hospital, and resuscitation interventions (e.g., laparotomy, blood transfusion) with the potential to have provided a survival benefit.
RESULTS
Of 388 US Special Operations Command battle-injured fatalities, 100 were deemed potentially survivable. Of these (median age, 29 years; all male), 76.0% were injured in Afghanistan, and 75% died prehospital. Gunshot wounds were in 62.0%, followed by blast injury (37%), and blunt force injury (1.0%). Most had a Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale severity classified as 4 (severe) (55.0%) and 5 (critical) (41.0%). The panel recommended 433 interventions (prehospital, 188; hospital, 315). The most recommended prehospital intervention was blood transfusion (95%), followed by finger/tube thoracostomy (47%). The most common hospital recommendations were thoracotomy and definitive vascular repair. Whole blood transfusion was assessed for each fatality: 74% would have required ≥10 U of blood, 20% would have required 5 to 10 U, 1% would have required 1 to 4 U, and 5% would not have required blood products to impact survival. Five may have benefited from a prehospital laparotomy.
CONCLUSION
This study systematically identified capabilities needed to provide a survival benefit and examined interventions needed to inform trauma system efforts along the continuum of care. The determination was that blood transfusion and massive transfusion shortly after traumatic injury would impact survival the most.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Expert Opinion; Level V.
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Reference19 articles.
1. Causes of death in U.S. Special Operations Forces in the global war on terrorism: 2001–2004;Ann Surg,2007
2. Injury severity and causes of death from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom: 2003–2004 versus 2006;J Trauma,2008
3. Died of wounds on the battlefield: causation and implications for improving combat casualty care;J Trauma,2011
4. Death on the battlefield (2001–2011): implications for the future of combat casualty care;J Trauma Acute Care Surg,2012
5. Mortality review of US Special Operations Command Battle-injured fatalities;J Trauma Acute Care Surg,2020