Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Evaluation and management of blunt cerebrovascular injury: A practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

  • Dennis Y. Kim
  • , Walter Biffl
  • , Faran Bokhari
  • , Scott Brakenridge
  • , Edward Chao
  • , Jeffrey A. Claridge
  • , Douglas Fraser
  • , Randeep Jawa
  • , George Kasotakis
  • , Andy Kerwin
  • , Uzer Khan
  • , Stan Kurek
  • , David Plurad
  • , Bryce R.H. Robinson
  • , Nicole Stassen
  • , Ron Tesoriero
  • , Brian Yorkgitis
  • , John J. Como
  • University of California at Los Angeles
  • Scripps Memorial Hospital
  • Rush University
  • University of Florida
  • Jacobi Medical Center
  • Case Western Reserve University
  • University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  • Duke University
  • West Virginia University
  • NorthStar Trauma Surgery
  • Riverside Community Hospital
  • University of Washington
  • University of Rochester
  • University of Maryland Medical Center

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

116 Scopus citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND Blunt cerebrovascular injuries (BCVIs) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This guideline evaluates several aspects of BCVI diagnosis and management including the role of screening protocols, criteria for screening cervical spine injuries, and the use of antithrombotic therapy (ATT) and endovascular stents. METHODS Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, a taskforce of the Practice Management Guidelines Committee of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of currently available evidence. Four population, intervention, comparison, and outcome questions were developed to address diagnostic and therapeutic issues relevant to BCVI. RESULTS A total of 98 articles were identified. Of these, 23 articles were selected to construct the guidelines. In these studies, the detection of BCVI increased with the use of a screening protocol versus no screening protocol (odds ratio [OR], 4.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.76-12.78; p = 0.002), as well as among patients with high-risk versus low-risk cervical spine injuries (OR, 12.7; 95% CI, 6.24-25.62; p = 0.003). The use of ATT versus no ATT resulted in a decreased risk of stroke (OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06-0.65; p < 0.0001) and mortality (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.08-0.34; p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the risk of stroke among patients with Grade II or III injuries who underwent stenting as an adjunct to ATT versus ATT alone (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.2-12.14; p = 0.63). CONCLUSION We recommend using a screening protocol to detect BCVI in blunt polytrauma patients. Among patients with high-risk cervical spine injuries, we recommend screening computed tomography angiography to detect BCVI. For patients with low-risk risk cervical injuries, we conditionally recommend performing a computed tomography angiography to detect BCVI. We recommend the use of ATT in patients diagnosed with BCVI. Finally, we recommend against the routine use of endovascular stents as an adjunct to ATT in patients with Grade II or III BCVIs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Guidelines, Level III.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)875-887
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
Volume88
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2020

Keywords

  • Blunt cerebrovascular injury
  • antithrombotic; stent
  • carotid artery injury
  • vertebral artery injury

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation and management of blunt cerebrovascular injury: A practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this