pREBOA vs ER-REBOA impact on blood utilization and resuscitation requirements: A pilot analysis

BACKGROUND Partial occlusion of the aorta is a resuscitation technique designed to maximize proximal perfusion while allowing a graduated amount of distal flow to reduce the ischemic sequelae associated with complete aortic occlusion. The pREBOA catheter affords the ability to titrate perfusion as hemodynamics allows, however, the impact of this new technology for REBOA on blood use and other resuscitative requirements is currently unknown. We hypothesize pREBOA’s ability to provide partial occlusion, when appropriate, decreases overall resuscitative requirements when compared to ER-REBOA. METHODS The entire AAST AORTA Registry was used to compare resuscitation requirements between all ER-REBOA and pREBOA. Unpaired t-tests were used to compare resuscitation strategies including packed red blood cells (PRBCs), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), platelets, cryoprecipitate, crystalloids, and need for pressors. RESULTS When comparing ER-REBOA (n=800) use to pREBOA (n=155), initial patient presentations were similar except for age (44 vs 40 p=0.026) and rates of blunt injury (78.4% vs 78.7% p<0.010). Zone-1 occlusion was used less often in ER-REBOA (65.8 vs 71.7 p=0.046). Partial occlusion was performed in 85% of pREBOA compared to 11% in ER-REBOA (p<0.050). Vitals at the time of REBOA were worse in ER-REBOA, and received significantly more units of PRBCs, FFP, platelets, and liters of crystalloids than pREBOA (p<0.05). Rates of ARDS and septic shock were lower in pREBOA (p<0.05). CONCLUSION When comparing pREBOA to ER-REBOA, there has been a rise in Zone-1 and partial occlusion. In our pilot analysis of the AORTA Registry, there was a reduction in administration of pRBC, FFP, platelets, and crystalloids. Though further prospective studies are required, this is the first to demonstrate an association between pREBOA, partial occlusion, and reduced blood use and resuscitative requirements.