Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta and traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A nationwide study.

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

ObjectiveResuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a less‐invasive method for temporary hemostasis compared with cross‐clamping the aorta through resuscitative thoracotomy (RT). Although the survival benefits of REBOA remained unclear, pathophysiological benefits were identified in patients with traumatic out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest (t‐OHCA). We examined the clinical outcomes of t‐OHCA with the hypothesis that REBOA would be associated with higher survival to discharge compared with RT.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Japan Trauma Data Bank (2004–2019). Adult patients with t‐OHCA who had arrived without a palpable pulse and undergone aortic occlusion were included. Patients were divided into REBOA or RT groups, and propensity scores were developed using age, mechanism of injury, presence of signs of life, presence of severe head and/or chest injury, Injury Severity Score, and transportation time. Inverse probability weighting by propensity scores was performed to compare survival to discharge between the 2 groups.ResultsAmong 13,247 patients with t‐OHCA, 1483 were included in this study. A total of 144 (9.7%) patients were treated with REBOA, and 5 of 144 (3.5%) in the REBOA group and 10 of 1339 (0.7%) in the RT group survived to discharge. The use of REBOA was significantly associated with increased survival to discharge (odds ratio, 4.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.61–14.19), which was confirmed by inverse probability weighting (adjusted odds ratio, 3.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.90–7.32).ConclusionsREBOA for t‐OHCA was associated with higher survival to discharge. These results should be validated by further research.