ArticleResearch and reports in urology2022
Implementation of a Standardized Renal Trauma Protocol at a Level 1 Trauma Center: 7-Year Protocol and 10-Year Institutional Review.
Article in Research and reports in urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Current urologic renal trauma guidelines favor conservative management. In 2012, we implemented an institution-wide renal trauma protocol to standardize management. This protocol details initiation of DVT (deep vein thrombosis) prophylaxis, cessation of bed rest, and frequency of laboratory studies. We hypothesized that low-grade injuries (grade I-III) could be managed without urologic consultation and that our chemical DVT prophylaxis regimen would not pose an increased risk of hemorrhage requiring transfusion. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of a prospectively maintained database containing all renal trauma at our institution from 2009 to 2019. We segregated injuries based on grade, presence of multi-organ trauma, and evaluated the presence and types of intervention, initiation of chemical DVT prophylaxis, and post-DVT prophylaxis hemorrhage requiring transfusion. Results: We identified 295 cases of renal trauma, of which 62 were isolated injuries. Forty-three of the isolated renal injuries were transferred from outside facilities, 70% of which were classified as low-grade injuries. There were 220 low-grade lacerations and 75 high-grade lacerations. No grade I or II lacerations required any interventions. Two (2.5%) grade III lacerations required IR embolization. Twenty-five (41%) grade IV lacerations required intervention, of which five were nephrectomy. Seven (54%) grade V lacerations required intervention, of which 5 were nephrectomies. Upon review of our protocol with early ambulation and DVT prophylaxis, there were no cases of isolated renal injury where initiation of either treatment resulted in delayed hemorrhage requiring transfusion or surgical intervention. Conclusion: Only 2/220 low-grade renal lacerations required intervention. Our data suggest that grade I and II renal lacerations can be managed safely without urologic consultation. Consultation is warranted for grade III injuries given the possibility of initial understaging. Furthermore, we believe our renal laceration protocol in our admittedly small, isolated sample has shown our DVT prophylaxis initiation to not pose increased risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.