Surgical Damage Control and Temporary Vascular Shunts





Key Words:

vascular , injury , trauma , blood vessel , shunt , damage control surgery , ligation , temporary vascular control , extremity vascular injury , truncal vascular injury

 



“We should not rest content with the work of our predecessors, or assume that it has proved everything conclusively, on the contrary it should serve only as a stimulus to further investigation.” Ambroise Paré




Introduction


The past 20 years has witnessed a fundamental change in the management of the severely injured patient. Perhaps the most notable change is the concept of the damage control or staged laparotomy. Stone and colleagues provided the landmark description of a staged operation in trauma in 1983. With intent to limit the physiologic burden on an already-threatened patient, they demonstrated a significant survival advantage in a series of 17 patients. Later coined by Rotondo et al as “damage control surgery,” this concept of limiting the “bloody vicious cycle” of hypothermia, acidosis, and coagulopathy has been embraced by nearly every major trauma center with reproducible results. One of the major tenets of staged laparotomy as described by Stone and colleagues was the attention to control and repair of major blood vessel injuries. Hemorrhage (and, subsequently, hemorrhagic shock) is perhaps the most significant factor contributing to the triad of coagulopathic bleeding. Incidentally, the management of injured blood vessels in a severely injured patient is often arduous, technically demanding, and time-consuming, all of which can force ligation out of desperation. This chapter provides a review of a renewed technique that offers a viable alternative to ligation and that adheres to the mantra of damage control—temporary intravascular shunts.


Temporary vascular shunts have many benefits in the multiply-injured patient. Not only do they allow for reperfusion and/or venous decompression across the injured vessel, but they also afford time to transport a patient to a higher level of care or to manage concomitant life-threatening injuries. In this context, “extra time” means that flow is restored across the injured artery and/or vein through the shunt while resuscitation, orthopedic fixation, cranial decompression, or other damage control procedures are performed.




Historical Use of Intravascular Shunts


The concept of an implantable prosthetic conduit has a long history with first descriptions in World War I by Tuffier and Makins. These paraffin-lined silver tubes were initially proposed for the perceived advantages of sutureless technique and were meant for permanent placement. The goal was not long-term patency of the conduit but rather a temporary means of perfusion that would provoke collateralization as the tube slowly occluded. In 1932, Blakemore and Lord introduced use of a new composite alloy called Vitallium (composed of cobalt, chromium, and molybdenum). Initially, the Vitallium tube was internally lined with vein graft; but this was soon followed by a two-tube method with interposed vein, again as a sutureless technique ( Fig. 17-1 ). Despite theoretical advantages and widespread dissemination in World War II, the use of such tubes was limited by logistics and by frustratingly prolonged medical evacuation times of the wounded to the surgical facilities.




FIGURE 17-1


Illustration of the experimental and clinical application of the Vitallium-tube techniques used by Blakemore and Lord.

(From Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott William and Wilkins, annals of Surgery 1945) (Also in Hancock H, Rasmussen TE, Walker AJ, et al: History of temporary intravascular shunts in the management of vascular injury. J Vasc Surg 52[5]:1405–1409, 2010.)


Experimental use of intravascular shunts as a means of temporary restoration of blood flow has roots to both the French-Algerian war (1954-1962) and more extensively to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (1981-1985). An excellent synopsis of the Russian experience with temporary vascular shunts in Afghanistan and the Northern Caucuses is provided in the international section of this edition. Both accounts described use of temporary vascular shunts to maintain blood flow to allow time either for onward transport or to “administer antishock therapy.” Among the first modern descriptions of temporary intravascular shunts is from Eger et al, who in 1971 used a temporary vascular shunt prior to orthopedic fixation. This practice ultimately demonstrated a decreased frequency of extremity amputation in the setting of complex popliteal artery injury.




Modern Use of Intravascular Shunts


Despite advances in civilian damage control surgery, use of temporary vascular shunts in trauma had been limited to a few case series prior to the events of September 11, 2001 ( Table 17-1 ). One bittersweet effect of wartime is the renaissance of surgical experience, technology, and technique. In a report from Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), Rasmussen et al described a 1-year experience of 126 extremity vascular injuries, in which 30 temporary vascular shunts were utilized in the management of vascular injury. In this report, shunts were used as damage control adjuncts to either facilitate casualty evacuation or to allow perfusion while other life-threatening injuries were managed. In this series, 57% of the patients had patent shunts on arrival to a higher level of care (typically less than 2 hours after initial surgery). The authors noted that patency of the shunts hours after placement was higher (86%) when they had been used in larger, more proximal vessel injuries. The favorable experience with the use of vascular shunts in this initial report was corroborated by subsequent series provided by other combat surgical teams. Figures 17-2, A-C detail a case example in which a midsubclavian injury was initially treated at a forward surgical location with the insertion of an intraluminal shunt and subsequently was repaired with interposition graft at a higher level of care.



Table 17-1

Civilian Shunt Small Series

Adapted from Rasmussen TE, Clause WD, Jenkins DH, et al: The use of temporary vascular shunts as a damage control adjunct in the management of wartime vascular injury. J Trauma 61:8–12, 2006; discussion 12–15.








































Series Publication Year #Number of Patients
Hossny et al 2004 9
Sriussadaporn et al 2002 7
Reber et al 1999 7
Granchi et al 2000 19
Husain et al 1992 5
Khalil et al 1986 5
Nichols et al 1986 13
Johansen et al 1982 10



FIGURE 17-2


A, The distal aspect of a Javid shunt inserted into the right axillary artery is shown in this image. The proximal aspect of the shunt had been placed in the proximal-most right subclavian artery and routed in an extraanatomic fashion above the clavicle, underneath the pectoralis major muscle, and out of the zone of injury which was the mid-right subclavian artery. B, A wider image of the same case showing the proximal aspect of the exposure, which was median sternotomy. The proximal Javid shunt has been removed and is secured with a hemostatic clamp in the upper portion of the photograph. The proximal anastomosis of a 6-mm ePTFE graft has been created to the origin of the right subclavian artery with the graft routed in an anatomic fashion in preparation for the distal anastomosis to the right axillary artery. C, A completion image following successful reconstruction using 6-mm ePTFE from the proximal-most right subclavian artery to the right axillary artery. The subclavian artery injury in this case was oversewn just proximal to the clavicle.

(Photographs courtesy Todd E. Rasmussen.)


Gifford and colleagues provided one of the only studies to characterize longer-term extremity outcomes following the use of temporary vascular shunts. In their study, the authors used case-controlled methodology to show that the use of temporary vascular shunts had no adverse outcome in the years following vascular repair and likely extended the window for limb salvage, especially in the most severely injured extremities. Finally in a recent and larger 10-year review of the civilian experience from Feliciano’s group at Grady Memorial, Subramanian et al confirmed the utility of temporary vascular shunts in certain patterns of vascular injury. This study demonstrated a 95% patency rate of shunts and an overall survival rate of 88% following major vascular injury. In this series of 101 vascular shunts, the authors documented a secondary amputation rate of 18% ( Table 17-2 ).



Table 17-2

Combat Versus Civilian Use of Temporary Vascular Shunts

Data from References .

























































































































Review Year Shunt Location Shunt Type and Number % Patency * Average Shunt Time Early (<30d) Secondary Amputations Shunt-Related Complications
Rasmussen et al (combat) 2004-2005 30 arterial 4 venous Javid 16 Arterial Proximal 86% <2 hr 2 0
Argyle 12 Distal 12%
Sundt 2 Venous Proximal 100%
Taller et al (combat) 2006-2007 14 arterial 9 venous Javid NL Arterial Proximal 100% ~5 hr 0 0
Argyle NL Venous 89%
Unknown NL
Chambers et al (combat) 2004-2005 18 arterial 11 venous Javid NL Arterial Proximal 86% ~1.5 hr 3 (1) 0
Distal 50%
Sundt NL Venous 82%
Borut et al (combat) 2003-2007 42 arterial 8 venous Argyle NL NL NL NL 4 (0) NL
Sundt NL
Javid NL
12 Fr feeding tube NL
Subramanian et al (civilian) 1997-2007 72 arterial 29 venous Argyle 61 Arterial 91% 23.5 hr 10 (1) 0
Chest tube 16
Pruitt-Inahara 20
5 Fr feeding tube 1 Venous 100%
16 ga Angiocath 1

d, Day; Fr, french; ga, gauge; hr, hour; NL, not listed.

* Proximal = brachial artery and proximal in upper extremity or popliteal artery and proximal in lower extremity.


Parentheses = secondary amputations attributable to shunt thrombosis.


Shunt-related complications = shunt displacement, bleeding, or thromboembolism.





Indications


Damage control—that is, physiologic instability or higher operative priorities precluding definitive reconstruction of an encountered vascular injury—is the primary indication for the use of a temporary shunt. The rapid placement of a shunt is useful to reduce the time to reperfusion (i.e., oxygen delivery) beyond the vascular injury when other higher-priority management steps are required. With the shunt in place, stabilization of associated fractures or performance of a laparotomy, craniotomy, or thorocotomy can be completed with the extremity or other end-organ perfused instead of ischemic. Finally, expedited placement of a shunt may be useful if a surgeon desires to curtail the intervention due lack of training in or currency with major vascular reconstruction. Placement of a shunt in the setting of prolonged ischemia provides end-organ perfusion and may even allow the infusion of medications designed to limit thrombosis or ischemia-reperfusion injury (e.g., heparin or mannitol). Use of a temporary vascular shunt in an axial vessel of a severely mangled extremity allows for the limb to be stabilized, débrided, and reassessed at a second-look operation if needed. This strategy allows for a more-organized mobilization requisite of surgical disciplines to assess the limb at a scheduled time after the initial operations has been performed. The indications for the use of temporary shunts are provided in Table 17-3 .



Table 17-3

Indications for Temporary Vascular Shunts

Adapted from Eger M, Golcman L, Goldstein A: The use of a temporary shunt in the management of arterial vascular injuries. Surg Gynecol Obstet 132(1):67–70, 1971.








  • Damage control surgery



  • Complex skeletal injury requiring fixation (e.g., Gustilo IIIc)



  • Temporary restoration of flow during vein harvest



  • Management of other injuries



  • Multiple vascular injuries



  • Prolonged ischemia (>6 hours)



  • Replantation of avulsed limbs



  • Temporary flow for delayed reevaluation in a mangled extremity





Shunt Materials


Many hollow tubular devices have been described to function as temporary vascular shunts including large-bore angiocatheters, sterile intravenous tubing, endotracheal tubes, feeding tubes, and small-caliber chest tubes. While these improvised shunts may provide temporary flow, they are not designed for this purpose, are predisposed to causing vessel injury, and are prone to thrombosis due to a number of physical characteristics. Currently there are no commonly used FDA-approved shunts for trauma, and surgeons must rely on off-label use of devices designed for use during carotid endarterectomy and other cardiovascular operations for age-related disease. Examples include the Javid (Bard PV, Tempe, AZ), Argyle (Covidien, Mansfield, MA), Sundt (Integra, Plainsboro, NJ), and Pruitt-Inahara (LeMaitre Vascular, Burlington, MA) shunts. There are no studies that have compared the effectiveness of these shunts to one another in the setting of trauma, and any one or more may be used for vascular trauma even at the same institution. Nevertheless, extrapolation from translational hemodynamic and hydrodynamic studies of commonly used shunts seems to favor larger-diameter, in-line (shorter) shunts as they tend to produce higher flow rates and distal perfusion pressures. Aufiero et al also recommend the use of tapered shunts when smaller diameter shunts (<12 Fr) are required.


Several physical characteristics must be weighed when selecting the type of shunt to use, and a list of features of commonly used devices is provided in Table 17-4 . In-line shunts are shorter and useful when operative space is limited and when the gap in or injury to the vessel is short. In-line shunts lie inside of the injured vessel and, once in place, are not likely to become entangled with wound dressing material, surgical retractors, orthopedic fixator devices, or monitor wires, which often surround the injured extremity ( Figs. 17-3 and 17-4 ). Looped shunts are longer with a significant portion outside of the vessel and therefore are more prone to becoming entangled. However, looped shunts are more effective at bridging longer injuries or segments of missing vessel, and this design may be preferable when the vascular injury crosses a joint or an unstable fracture prone to significant motion. In these instances, the longer, looped shunt allows for motion across this defect with a lower likelihood of being dislodged. Finally, looped shunts allow visualization of arterial or venous flow and are readily assessed by continuous-wave Doppler ( Fig. 17-5 ). A unique design, the Pruitt-Inahara shunt is a side-arm port that may prove useful when angiography or drug infusion is required. Secured by proximal and distal balloons, placement of the Pruitt-Inahara may be more easily performed and avoids the need for excessive proximal and distal vessel dissection ( Fig. 17-6 ).


Oct 11, 2019 | Posted by in CARDIOLOGY | Comments Off on Surgical Damage Control and Temporary Vascular Shunts

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access