糖心vlog

Object moved to here.

Focused Empiricism and the Efficacy of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta | Cardiothoracic Surgery | JAMA Surgery | 糖心vlog

糖心vlog

[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
Invited Commentary
December 21, 2022

Focused Empiricism and the Efficacy of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
JAMA Surg. 2023;158(2):150-151. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2022.6430

Nearly half of patients who arrive at US trauma centers with hemoperitoneum and hypotension and one-quarter of service members killed in combat die just from blood loss and hemorrhagic shock.1-3 The age-old, surgeon-centric approach of quickly getting to the operating room works for most but not all patients. These stubborn statistics, along with the evolution of less invasive endovascular techniques used for other conditions, have resulted in a reappraisal of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA).4

The emergence of REBOA has disrupted practice paradigms and been accompanied by calls for 鈥渉igh-quality鈥 data to prove its merit.4 Despite the known or empirical benefit of aortic occlusion to increase proximal pressure, decrease distal bleeding, and delay onset of a fatal dysrhythmia, skeptics and those unaccustomed to endovascular procedures have used the paucity of high-quality data to refute REBOA. Although the search for therapeutic evidence should remain a guiding principle, such high-quality data support very few of the lifesaving interventions performed during trauma resuscitations and emergent operations today.

×