Why the study?
Opposing therapies for haemorrhage control and thromboembolism prevention after polytrauma can cause unexpected pathophysiology, posing a risk of misdiagnosis and harm.
Highlights a rare case of STEMI and tamponade mimic caused by retroperitoneal haematoma in a polytrauma patient, emphasizing the need for a high index of suspicion and multidisciplinary decision-making.
May prompt consideration of retroperitoneal hematoma in post-anticoagulation STEMI mimics; leaves open generalizability of percutaneous drainage.
Background: There exists a therapeutic conflict between haemorrhage control and prevention of thromboembolic events following polytrauma and complications are not uncommon. Such opposing therapies can result in unexpected pathophysiology and there is a real risk of misdiagnosis resulting in harm. This case presents a previously unreported complication of prevention and management of thromboembolism- STEMI (ST elevation myocardial infarction) and tamponade mimic secondary to retroperitoneal haematoma.Case presentation: We present a 50-year-old male polytrauma patient who following treatment for presumed pulmonary embolus demonstrated classical clinical findings of myocardial infarction and pericardial tamponade secondary to a retroperitoneal haematoma. This is an event not previously reported in the literature. The risk of adverse outcome by management along the standard lines of STEMI (ST elevation myocardial infarction) was averted through awareness for alternative aetiology via a multi-team approach which resulted in percutaneous drainage of the haematoma and complete resolution of symptoms.Conclusions: This manuscript highlights the therapeutic conflict between haemorrhage control and prevention of thromboembolic events in critically injured, the importance of high index of suspicion in this patient cohort and the benefits of multidisciplinary decision making in the complex patient through a not previously published pathophysiologic phenomenon.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brun et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: