Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta-Interest is widespread but need for training persists.

Abstract

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) was first described in the 1950s, but early attempts at REBOA faced several technical challenges. Subsequent advances in endovascular technologies led to renewed interest in employing REBOA for management of hemorrhagic shock. However, REBOA usage remains infrequent, and indications for REBOA implementation remain unclear. We evaluated current opinions of trauma surgeons toward the use of REBOA for control of trauma-related hemorrhage and other causes of hemorrhagic shock. We hypothesize, that despite heightened interest in REBOA, implementation remains limited. A 25-question survey was thus created to query institutional and surgeon-specific training and practice patterns related to REBOA usage. The anonymized survey was distributed via email to a national trauma surgeon database and responses were recorded online. 992 subjects were invited to participate, of whom 31% (n=311) responded. Of these, 89% reported to be a trauma or acute care surgeon at a Level I trauma center, 50% reported practicing for ≥20 years. Two-thirds (68%) reported REBOA use at their institution, and the majority (59%) employed REBOA at least once. However, most (78%) performed ≤5 REBOA placements last year. Respondents supported REBOA usage in non-trauma causes of shock including gastrointestinal bleeding (60%), post-partum hemorrhage (83%), and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (69%). A significant minority (20.3%) reported either only slight confidence or no confidence in their ability to deploy REBOA, and thus 21% reported being 'very interested' in attending a REBOA skills course.We thus conclude that REBOA has gained wide interest among trauma surgeons. However, placement remains infrequent with most providers placing a few annually. Educational courses are needed to disseminate the necessary skills for REBOA utilization.