oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Consensus on resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the Aorta: A first consensus paper using a Delphi method
Department of Surgery, Alrijne Hospital, Leiderdorp, the Netherlands.
Department of Trauma, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Israel.
R Adam Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland Medical System, Baltimore, USA.
Örebro University, School of Medical Sciences. Örebro University Hospital. Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery.
Show others and affiliations
2019 (English)In: Injury, ISSN 0020-1383, E-ISSN 1879-0267, Vol. 50, no 6, p. 1186-1191Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: To further strengthen the evidence base on the use of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) we performed a Delphi consensus. The aim of this paper is to establish consensus on the indications and contraindications for the use of REBOA in trauma and non-trauma patients based on the existing evidence and expertise.

Study Design: A literature review facilitated the design of a three-round Delphi questionnaire. Delphi panelists were identified by the investigators. Consensus was reached when at least 70% of the panelists responded to the survey and more than 70% of respondents reached agreement or disagreement.

Results: Panel members reached consensus on potential indications, contra-indications and settings for use of REBOA (excluding the pre hospital environment), physiological parameters for patient selection and indications for early femoral access. Panel members failed to reach consensus on the use of REBOA in patients in extremis (no pulse, no blood pressure) and the use of REBOA in patients with two major bleeding sites.

Conclusions: Consensus was reached on indications, contra indications, physiological parameters for patient selection for REBOA and early femoral access. The panel did not reach consensus on the use of REBOA in patients in pre-hospital settings, patients in extremis (no pulse, no blood pressure) and in patients with 2 or more major bleeding sites. Further research should focus on the indications of REBOA in pre hospital settings, patients in near cardiac arrest and REBOA inflation times.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2019. Vol. 50, no 6, p. 1186-1191
Keywords [en]
REBOA, Delphi consensus, Indications, contra indications
National Category
Surgery
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-75247DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.04.024ISI: 000470813800005PubMedID: 31047681Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85064740177OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-75247DiVA, id: diva2:1338974
Available from: 2019-07-25 Created: 2019-07-25 Last updated: 2019-07-25Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records BETA

Hörer, Tal M.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hörer, Tal M.
By organisation
School of Medical SciencesÖrebro University Hospital
In the same journal
Injury
Surgery

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf