Abstract

BackgroundThere exists a therapeutic conflict between haemorrhage control and prevention of thromboembolic events following polytrauma and complications are not uncommon. Such opposing therapies can result in unexpected pathophysiology and there is a real risk of misdiagnosis resulting in harm. This case presents a previously unreported complication of prevention and management of thromboembolism- STEMI (ST elevation myocardial infarction) and tamponade mimic secondary to retroperitoneal haematoma.Case presentationWe present a 50-year-old male polytrauma patient who following treatment for presumed pulmonary embolus demonstrated classical clinical findings of myocardial infarction and pericardial tamponade secondary to a retroperitoneal haematoma. This is an event not previously reported in the literature. The risk of adverse outcome by management along the standard lines of STEMI (ST elevation myocardial infarction) was averted through awareness for alternative aetiology via a multi-team approach which resulted in percutaneous drainage of the haematoma and complete resolution of symptoms.ConclusionsThis manuscript highlights the therapeutic conflict between haemorrhage control and prevention of thromboembolic events in critically injured, the importance of high index of suspicion in this patient cohort and the benefits of multidisciplinary decision making in the complex patient through a not previously published pathophysiologic phenomenon.

Highlights

  • This manuscript highlights the therapeutic conflict between haemorrhage control and prevention of thromboembolic events in critically injured, the importance of high index of suspicion in this patient cohort and the benefits of multidisciplinary decision making in the complex patient through a not previously published pathophysiologic phenomenon

  • Trauma patients are at high risk for venous thrombosis the consequences of which can be catastrophic for survivors [1]

  • In the event of a major thrombotic complication, such as a pulmonary embolus (PE), therapeutic anticoagulation and even thrombolysis [2, 3] must be considered further heightening the risk of haemorrhagic complications

Read more

Summary

Conclusions

This manuscript highlights the therapeutic conflict between haemorrhage control and prevention of thromboembolic events in critically injured, the importance of high index of suspicion in this patient cohort and the benefits of multidisciplinary decision making in the complex patient through a not previously published pathophysiologic phenomenon.

Introduction
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.