Trauma

Children aged 5-12 years with concussion have similar recovery trajectories, regardless of whether the injury is linked to sports or to other causes, such as falls, new data indicated. 

“With that result, it means we don’t need to change management protocols” depending on the cause of the concussion, study author Andrée-Anne Ledoux, PhD, a scientist at Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, said in an interview. “That’s kind of good news. We’re applying the right management protocols with them.”

The data were published on December 4 in JAMA Network Open.

 

Secondary Analysis

The results stem from a planned secondary analysis of the prospective Predicting and Preventing Postconcussive Problems in Pediatrics study. Conducted from August 2013 to June 2015 at nine pediatric emergency departments in Canada, it included children of different ages (5 to < 18 years), genders, demographic characteristics, and comorbidities. All participants had a concussion.

The secondary analysis focused on study participants who were aged 5-12 years and had presented within 48 hours of injury. The primary outcome was symptom change, which was defined as current ratings minus preinjury ratings, across time (1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks), measured using the Post-Concussion Symptom Inventory.

No significant differences in postinjury recovery curves were found between participants with sport-related concussions (SRC) and those with non-SRC. The latter injuries resulted from causes such as falls and objects dropped on heads. SRC and non-SRC showed a nonlinear association with time, with symptoms decreasing over time.

Perhaps surprisingly, the researchers also reported a higher rate of persisting symptoms after concussion (PSAC) following limited contact sports than following contact sports such as hockey, soccer, rugby, lacrosse, and football. Limited contact sports include activities such as bicycling, horseback riding, tobogganing, gymnastics, and cheerleading.

This finding suggests that the management of SRC may not require distinct strategies based on sports classification, the researchers wrote. “Instead, it may be more appropriate for clinicians to consider the specific dynamics of the activity, such as velocity and risk of falls from heights. This nuanced perspective can aid in assessing the likelihood of persisting symptoms.” The researchers urged more investigation of this question. “A larger sample with more information on injury height and velocity would be required to confirm whether an association exists.”

In addition, the researchers cited guidelines that include a recommendation for a gradual return to low to moderate physical and cognitive activity starting 24-48 hours after a concussion at a level that does not result in recurrence or exacerbation of symptoms.

“Children do need to return to their lives. They need to return to school,” said Ledoux. “They can have accommodations while they return to school, but just returning to school has huge benefits because you’re reintegrating the child into their typical lifestyle and socialization as well.”

A potential limitation of the study was its reliance on participants who had been seen in emergency departments and thus may have been experiencing more intense symptoms than those seen elsewhere.

The researchers also excluded cases of concussion resulting from assaults and motor vehicle crashes. This decision may explain why they didn’t reproduce the previous observation that patients with SRC tended to recover faster than those with concussions from other causes.

Injuries resulting from assaults and motor vehicle crashes can involve damage beyond concussions, Ledoux said. Including these cases would not allow for an apples-to-apples comparison of SRC and non-SRC.

 

‘Don’t Cocoon Kids’

The authors of an accompanying editorial wrote that the researchers had done “a beautiful job highlighting this important nuance.” Noncontact sports with seemingly little risk “actually carry substantial risks when one imagines the high-impact forces that can occur with a fall from height, albeit rare,” Scott Zuckerman, MD, MPH, assistant professor of neurological surgery at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, and colleagues wrote.

The new analysis suggests a need to rethink a “somewhat archaic way of classifying sport risk, which may oversimplify how we categorize risk of brain and spine injuries.”

The commentary also noted how the researchers used the term PSAC to describe lingering symptoms instead of more widely used terms like “persistent postconcussive symptoms” or “postconcussive syndrome.”

“These traditional terms often connote a permanent syndrome or assumption that the concussion itself is solely responsible for 100% of symptoms, which can be harmful to a patient’s recovery,” the editorialists wrote. “Conversely, PSAC offers room for the clinician to discuss how other causes may be maintaining, magnifying, or mimicking concussion symptoms.”

Commenting on the findings, Richard Figler, MD, an orthopedic surgeon at the Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, praised the researchers for addressing concussion in younger children, a field in which little research has been conducted. The research supports the current approaches to treatment. The approach has shifted toward easing children quickly and safely back into normal routines. “We don’t cocoon kids. We don’t send them to dark rooms,” Figler added.

He also commended the researchers’ decision to examine data about concussions linked to limited contact sports. In contact sports, participants may be more likely to anticipate and prepare for a hit. That’s not the case with injuries sustained in limited contact sports.

“Dodgeball is basically a sucker punch. That’s why these kids have so many concussions,” said Figler. “They typically don’t see the ball coming, or they can’t get out of the way, and they can’t tense themselves to take that blow.”

The Predicting and Preventing Postconcussive Problems in Pediatrics study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research-Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Team. Ledoux reported receiving grants from the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Foundation, Ontario Brain Institute, and University of Ottawa Brain and Mind Research Institute. She received nonfinancial support from Mobio Interactive outside the submitted work. Zuckerman reported receiving personal fees from the National Football League and Medtronic outside the submitted work. Figler had no relevant financial disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Children aged 5-12 years with concussion have similar recovery trajectories, regardless of whether the injury is linked to sports or to other causes, such as falls, new data indicated. 

“With that result, it means we don’t need to change management protocols” depending on the cause of the concussion, study author Andrée-Anne Ledoux, PhD, a scientist at Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, said in an interview. “That’s kind of good news. We’re applying the right management protocols with them.”

The data were published on December 4 in JAMA Network Open.

 

Secondary Analysis

The results stem from a planned secondary analysis of the prospective Predicting and Preventing Postconcussive Problems in Pediatrics study. Conducted from August 2013 to June 2015 at nine pediatric emergency departments in Canada, it included children of different ages (5 to < 18 years), genders, demographic characteristics, and comorbidities. All participants had a concussion.

The secondary analysis focused on study participants who were aged 5-12 years and had presented within 48 hours of injury. The primary outcome was symptom change, which was defined as current ratings minus preinjury ratings, across time (1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks), measured using the Post-Concussion Symptom Inventory.

No significant differences in postinjury recovery curves were found between participants with sport-related concussions (SRC) and those with non-SRC. The latter injuries resulted from causes such as falls and objects dropped on heads. SRC and non-SRC showed a nonlinear association with time, with symptoms decreasing over time.

Perhaps surprisingly, the researchers also reported a higher rate of persisting symptoms after concussion (PSAC) following limited contact sports than following contact sports such as hockey, soccer, rugby, lacrosse, and football. Limited contact sports include activities such as bicycling, horseback riding, tobogganing, gymnastics, and cheerleading.

This finding suggests that the management of SRC may not require distinct strategies based on sports classification, the researchers wrote. “Instead, it may be more appropriate for clinicians to consider the specific dynamics of the activity, such as velocity and risk of falls from heights. This nuanced perspective can aid in assessing the likelihood of persisting symptoms.” The researchers urged more investigation of this question. “A larger sample with more information on injury height and velocity would be required to confirm whether an association exists.”

In addition, the researchers cited guidelines that include a recommendation for a gradual return to low to moderate physical and cognitive activity starting 24-48 hours after a concussion at a level that does not result in recurrence or exacerbation of symptoms.

“Children do need to return to their lives. They need to return to school,” said Ledoux. “They can have accommodations while they return to school, but just returning to school has huge benefits because you’re reintegrating the child into their typical lifestyle and socialization as well.”

A potential limitation of the study was its reliance on participants who had been seen in emergency departments and thus may have been experiencing more intense symptoms than those seen elsewhere.

The researchers also excluded cases of concussion resulting from assaults and motor vehicle crashes. This decision may explain why they didn’t reproduce the previous observation that patients with SRC tended to recover faster than those with concussions from other causes.

Injuries resulting from assaults and motor vehicle crashes can involve damage beyond concussions, Ledoux said. Including these cases would not allow for an apples-to-apples comparison of SRC and non-SRC.

 

‘Don’t Cocoon Kids’

The authors of an accompanying editorial wrote that the researchers had done “a beautiful job highlighting this important nuance.” Noncontact sports with seemingly little risk “actually carry substantial risks when one imagines the high-impact forces that can occur with a fall from height, albeit rare,” Scott Zuckerman, MD, MPH, assistant professor of neurological surgery at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, and colleagues wrote.

The new analysis suggests a need to rethink a “somewhat archaic way of classifying sport risk, which may oversimplify how we categorize risk of brain and spine injuries.”

The commentary also noted how the researchers used the term PSAC to describe lingering symptoms instead of more widely used terms like “persistent postconcussive symptoms” or “postconcussive syndrome.”

“These traditional terms often connote a permanent syndrome or assumption that the concussion itself is solely responsible for 100% of symptoms, which can be harmful to a patient’s recovery,” the editorialists wrote. “Conversely, PSAC offers room for the clinician to discuss how other causes may be maintaining, magnifying, or mimicking concussion symptoms.”

Commenting on the findings, Richard Figler, MD, an orthopedic surgeon at the Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, praised the researchers for addressing concussion in younger children, a field in which little research has been conducted. The research supports the current approaches to treatment. The approach has shifted toward easing children quickly and safely back into normal routines. “We don’t cocoon kids. We don’t send them to dark rooms,” Figler added.

He also commended the researchers’ decision to examine data about concussions linked to limited contact sports. In contact sports, participants may be more likely to anticipate and prepare for a hit. That’s not the case with injuries sustained in limited contact sports.

“Dodgeball is basically a sucker punch. That’s why these kids have so many concussions,” said Figler. “They typically don’t see the ball coming, or they can’t get out of the way, and they can’t tense themselves to take that blow.”

The Predicting and Preventing Postconcussive Problems in Pediatrics study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research-Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Team. Ledoux reported receiving grants from the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Foundation, Ontario Brain Institute, and University of Ottawa Brain and Mind Research Institute. She received nonfinancial support from Mobio Interactive outside the submitted work. Zuckerman reported receiving personal fees from the National Football League and Medtronic outside the submitted work. Figler had no relevant financial disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Children aged 5-12 years with concussion have similar recovery trajectories, regardless of whether the injury is linked to sports or to other causes, such as falls, new data indicated. 

“With that result, it means we don’t need to change management protocols” depending on the cause of the concussion, study author Andrée-Anne Ledoux, PhD, a scientist at Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, said in an interview. “That’s kind of good news. We’re applying the right management protocols with them.”

The data were published on December 4 in JAMA Network Open.

 

Secondary Analysis

The results stem from a planned secondary analysis of the prospective Predicting and Preventing Postconcussive Problems in Pediatrics study. Conducted from August 2013 to June 2015 at nine pediatric emergency departments in Canada, it included children of different ages (5 to < 18 years), genders, demographic characteristics, and comorbidities. All participants had a concussion.

The secondary analysis focused on study participants who were aged 5-12 years and had presented within 48 hours of injury. The primary outcome was symptom change, which was defined as current ratings minus preinjury ratings, across time (1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks), measured using the Post-Concussion Symptom Inventory.

No significant differences in postinjury recovery curves were found between participants with sport-related concussions (SRC) and those with non-SRC. The latter injuries resulted from causes such as falls and objects dropped on heads. SRC and non-SRC showed a nonlinear association with time, with symptoms decreasing over time.

Perhaps surprisingly, the researchers also reported a higher rate of persisting symptoms after concussion (PSAC) following limited contact sports than following contact sports such as hockey, soccer, rugby, lacrosse, and football. Limited contact sports include activities such as bicycling, horseback riding, tobogganing, gymnastics, and cheerleading.

This finding suggests that the management of SRC may not require distinct strategies based on sports classification, the researchers wrote. “Instead, it may be more appropriate for clinicians to consider the specific dynamics of the activity, such as velocity and risk of falls from heights. This nuanced perspective can aid in assessing the likelihood of persisting symptoms.” The researchers urged more investigation of this question. “A larger sample with more information on injury height and velocity would be required to confirm whether an association exists.”

In addition, the researchers cited guidelines that include a recommendation for a gradual return to low to moderate physical and cognitive activity starting 24-48 hours after a concussion at a level that does not result in recurrence or exacerbation of symptoms.

“Children do need to return to their lives. They need to return to school,” said Ledoux. “They can have accommodations while they return to school, but just returning to school has huge benefits because you’re reintegrating the child into their typical lifestyle and socialization as well.”

A potential limitation of the study was its reliance on participants who had been seen in emergency departments and thus may have been experiencing more intense symptoms than those seen elsewhere.

The researchers also excluded cases of concussion resulting from assaults and motor vehicle crashes. This decision may explain why they didn’t reproduce the previous observation that patients with SRC tended to recover faster than those with concussions from other causes.

Injuries resulting from assaults and motor vehicle crashes can involve damage beyond concussions, Ledoux said. Including these cases would not allow for an apples-to-apples comparison of SRC and non-SRC.

 

‘Don’t Cocoon Kids’

The authors of an accompanying editorial wrote that the researchers had done “a beautiful job highlighting this important nuance.” Noncontact sports with seemingly little risk “actually carry substantial risks when one imagines the high-impact forces that can occur with a fall from height, albeit rare,” Scott Zuckerman, MD, MPH, assistant professor of neurological surgery at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, and colleagues wrote.

The new analysis suggests a need to rethink a “somewhat archaic way of classifying sport risk, which may oversimplify how we categorize risk of brain and spine injuries.”

The commentary also noted how the researchers used the term PSAC to describe lingering symptoms instead of more widely used terms like “persistent postconcussive symptoms” or “postconcussive syndrome.”

“These traditional terms often connote a permanent syndrome or assumption that the concussion itself is solely responsible for 100% of symptoms, which can be harmful to a patient’s recovery,” the editorialists wrote. “Conversely, PSAC offers room for the clinician to discuss how other causes may be maintaining, magnifying, or mimicking concussion symptoms.”

Commenting on the findings, Richard Figler, MD, an orthopedic surgeon at the Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, praised the researchers for addressing concussion in younger children, a field in which little research has been conducted. The research supports the current approaches to treatment. The approach has shifted toward easing children quickly and safely back into normal routines. “We don’t cocoon kids. We don’t send them to dark rooms,” Figler added.

He also commended the researchers’ decision to examine data about concussions linked to limited contact sports. In contact sports, participants may be more likely to anticipate and prepare for a hit. That’s not the case with injuries sustained in limited contact sports.

“Dodgeball is basically a sucker punch. That’s why these kids have so many concussions,” said Figler. “They typically don’t see the ball coming, or they can’t get out of the way, and they can’t tense themselves to take that blow.”

The Predicting and Preventing Postconcussive Problems in Pediatrics study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research-Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Team. Ledoux reported receiving grants from the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Foundation, Ontario Brain Institute, and University of Ottawa Brain and Mind Research Institute. She received nonfinancial support from Mobio Interactive outside the submitted work. Zuckerman reported receiving personal fees from the National Football League and Medtronic outside the submitted work. Figler had no relevant financial disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE: 

Among children with traumatic injury, those of Black ethnicity are more likely than those of White ethnicity to be suspected of experiencing child abuse. Young patients and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds also face an increased likelihood of suspicion for child abuse (SCA).

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers analyzed data on pediatric patients admitted to hospitals after sustaining a traumatic injury between 2006 and 2016 using the Kids’ Inpatient Database (KID) to investigate racial and ethnic disparities in cases in which SCA codes from the 9th and 10th editions of the International Classification of Diseases were used.
• The analysis included a weighted total of 634,309 pediatric patients with complete data, comprising 13,579 patients in the SCA subgroup and 620,730 in the non-SCA subgroup.
• Patient demographics, injury severity, and hospitalization characteristics were classified by race and ethnicity.
• The primary outcome was differences in racial and ethnic composition between the SCA and non-SCA groups, as well as compared with the overall US population using 2010 US Census data.

TAKEAWAY:

• Black patients had 75% higher odds of having a SCA code, compared with White patients; the latter ethnicity was relatively underrepresented in the SCA subgroup, compared with the distribution reported by the US Census.
• Black patients had 10% higher odds of having a SCA code (odds ratio, 1.10; P =.004) than White patients, after socioeconomic factors such as insurance type, household income based on zip code, and injury severity were controlled for.
• Black patients in the SCA subgroup experienced a 26.5% (P < .001) longer hospital stay for mild to moderate injuries and a 40.1% (P < .001) longer stay for serious injuries compared with White patients.
• Patients in the SCA subgroup were significantly younger (mean, 1.70 years vs 9.70 years), were more likely to have Medicaid insurance (76.6% vs 42.0%), and had higher mortality rates (5.6% vs 1.0%) than those in the non-SCA subgroup; they were also more likely to come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and present with more severe injuries.

IN PRACTICE:

“However, we can identify and appropriately respond to patients with potential child abuse in an equitable way by using clinical decision support tools, seeking clinical consultation of child abuse pediatricians, practicing cultural humility, and enhancing the education and training for health care professionals on child abuse recognition, response, and prevention,” Allison M. Jackson, MD, MPH, of the Child and Adolescent Protection Center at Children’s National Hospital, Washington, DC, wrote in an accompanying editorial.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Fereshteh Salimi-Jazi, MD, of Stanford University School of Medicine in California. It was published online on December 18, 2024, in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS: 

The study relied on data from KID, which has limitations such as potential coding errors and the inability to follow patients over time. The database combines race and ethnicity in a single field as well. The study only included hospitalized patients, which may not represent all clinician suspicions of SCA cases.

DISCLOSURES:

This study was supported by a grant from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE: 

Among children with traumatic injury, those of Black ethnicity are more likely than those of White ethnicity to be suspected of experiencing child abuse. Young patients and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds also face an increased likelihood of suspicion for child abuse (SCA).

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers analyzed data on pediatric patients admitted to hospitals after sustaining a traumatic injury between 2006 and 2016 using the Kids’ Inpatient Database (KID) to investigate racial and ethnic disparities in cases in which SCA codes from the 9th and 10th editions of the International Classification of Diseases were used.
• The analysis included a weighted total of 634,309 pediatric patients with complete data, comprising 13,579 patients in the SCA subgroup and 620,730 in the non-SCA subgroup.
• Patient demographics, injury severity, and hospitalization characteristics were classified by race and ethnicity.
• The primary outcome was differences in racial and ethnic composition between the SCA and non-SCA groups, as well as compared with the overall US population using 2010 US Census data.

TAKEAWAY:

• Black patients had 75% higher odds of having a SCA code, compared with White patients; the latter ethnicity was relatively underrepresented in the SCA subgroup, compared with the distribution reported by the US Census.
• Black patients had 10% higher odds of having a SCA code (odds ratio, 1.10; P =.004) than White patients, after socioeconomic factors such as insurance type, household income based on zip code, and injury severity were controlled for.
• Black patients in the SCA subgroup experienced a 26.5% (P < .001) longer hospital stay for mild to moderate injuries and a 40.1% (P < .001) longer stay for serious injuries compared with White patients.
• Patients in the SCA subgroup were significantly younger (mean, 1.70 years vs 9.70 years), were more likely to have Medicaid insurance (76.6% vs 42.0%), and had higher mortality rates (5.6% vs 1.0%) than those in the non-SCA subgroup; they were also more likely to come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and present with more severe injuries.

IN PRACTICE:

“However, we can identify and appropriately respond to patients with potential child abuse in an equitable way by using clinical decision support tools, seeking clinical consultation of child abuse pediatricians, practicing cultural humility, and enhancing the education and training for health care professionals on child abuse recognition, response, and prevention,” Allison M. Jackson, MD, MPH, of the Child and Adolescent Protection Center at Children’s National Hospital, Washington, DC, wrote in an accompanying editorial.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Fereshteh Salimi-Jazi, MD, of Stanford University School of Medicine in California. It was published online on December 18, 2024, in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS: 

The study relied on data from KID, which has limitations such as potential coding errors and the inability to follow patients over time. The database combines race and ethnicity in a single field as well. The study only included hospitalized patients, which may not represent all clinician suspicions of SCA cases.

DISCLOSURES:

This study was supported by a grant from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE: 

Among children with traumatic injury, those of Black ethnicity are more likely than those of White ethnicity to be suspected of experiencing child abuse. Young patients and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds also face an increased likelihood of suspicion for child abuse (SCA).

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers analyzed data on pediatric patients admitted to hospitals after sustaining a traumatic injury between 2006 and 2016 using the Kids’ Inpatient Database (KID) to investigate racial and ethnic disparities in cases in which SCA codes from the 9th and 10th editions of the International Classification of Diseases were used.
• The analysis included a weighted total of 634,309 pediatric patients with complete data, comprising 13,579 patients in the SCA subgroup and 620,730 in the non-SCA subgroup.
• Patient demographics, injury severity, and hospitalization characteristics were classified by race and ethnicity.
• The primary outcome was differences in racial and ethnic composition between the SCA and non-SCA groups, as well as compared with the overall US population using 2010 US Census data.

TAKEAWAY:

• Black patients had 75% higher odds of having a SCA code, compared with White patients; the latter ethnicity was relatively underrepresented in the SCA subgroup, compared with the distribution reported by the US Census.
• Black patients had 10% higher odds of having a SCA code (odds ratio, 1.10; P =.004) than White patients, after socioeconomic factors such as insurance type, household income based on zip code, and injury severity were controlled for.
• Black patients in the SCA subgroup experienced a 26.5% (P < .001) longer hospital stay for mild to moderate injuries and a 40.1% (P < .001) longer stay for serious injuries compared with White patients.
• Patients in the SCA subgroup were significantly younger (mean, 1.70 years vs 9.70 years), were more likely to have Medicaid insurance (76.6% vs 42.0%), and had higher mortality rates (5.6% vs 1.0%) than those in the non-SCA subgroup; they were also more likely to come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and present with more severe injuries.

IN PRACTICE:

“However, we can identify and appropriately respond to patients with potential child abuse in an equitable way by using clinical decision support tools, seeking clinical consultation of child abuse pediatricians, practicing cultural humility, and enhancing the education and training for health care professionals on child abuse recognition, response, and prevention,” Allison M. Jackson, MD, MPH, of the Child and Adolescent Protection Center at Children’s National Hospital, Washington, DC, wrote in an accompanying editorial.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Fereshteh Salimi-Jazi, MD, of Stanford University School of Medicine in California. It was published online on December 18, 2024, in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS: 

The study relied on data from KID, which has limitations such as potential coding errors and the inability to follow patients over time. The database combines race and ethnicity in a single field as well. The study only included hospitalized patients, which may not represent all clinician suspicions of SCA cases.

DISCLOSURES:

This study was supported by a grant from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Patients receiving > 200 mL/kg of fluid resuscitation for burn injuries show higher rates of worsening neurologic findings on imaging, with follow-up scans showing deterioration in high-volume recipients compared with low-volume recipients.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers conducted a single-center review of 5176 patients with burn injuries who were admitted to a verified American Burn Association center (2003-2017); 622 of them underwent head CT within 96 hours of admission, and 83 showed intracranial abnormalities.
• Of 42 patients (mean age, 49.7 years; 80.5% men) who were admitted within 24 hours of burn, 30 patients received < 200 mL/kg and 11 received > 200 mL/kg of total resuscitation fluids, with a median total body surface area (TBSA) of 20.0.
• The primary outcome assessed was the worsening of neurologic findings on imaging related to the volume of the resuscitation fluid administered; the secondary outcomes were the incidence of new or worsening intracranial abnormalities, including hemorrhage, edema, ischemia, or infarction.

TAKEAWAY:

• Neurologic findings worsened in 47.6% patients receiving < 200 mL/kg of fluid resuscitation and 85.7% of those receiving > 200 mL/kg (P =.064).
• Repeat imaging was performed in 21 (70.0%) patients receiving < 200 mL/kg and 7 (63.6%) patients receiving > 200 mL/kg of resuscitation who underwent follow-up imaging.
• The median TBSA was 16.5 in the < 200 mL/kg group and 53.2 in the > 200 mL/kg group (P <.001).
• Intracranial abnormalities were found in 31.3% patients with hemorrhage, 18.8% with worsening edema, and 43.8% with ischemia or infarction.

IN PRACTICE:

“Patients who received over 200 mL/kg of resuscitation had an increased progression of intracranial abnormalities when compared with patients receiving less volume resuscitation,” the authors wrote. “Neurologic changes prompting imaging in burn patients may be undetectable, and our study further highlights the need for routine evaluation with neurologic imaging when undergoing large-volume resuscitations.”

SOURCE:

The study was led by Connor L. Kenney, MD, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, and was published online on November 07, 2024, in the Journal of Surgical Research.

LIMITATIONS:

Study limitations included a small patient sample and unclear guidelines for obtaining head CT scans, making it difficult to distinguish between trauma-related brain changes and disease progression. Additionally, the study lacked data on hypotensive episodes and long-term neurologic outcomes.

DISCLOSURES:

This study did not receive any specific funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including artificial intelligence, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Patients receiving > 200 mL/kg of fluid resuscitation for burn injuries show higher rates of worsening neurologic findings on imaging, with follow-up scans showing deterioration in high-volume recipients compared with low-volume recipients.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers conducted a single-center review of 5176 patients with burn injuries who were admitted to a verified American Burn Association center (2003-2017); 622 of them underwent head CT within 96 hours of admission, and 83 showed intracranial abnormalities.
• Of 42 patients (mean age, 49.7 years; 80.5% men) who were admitted within 24 hours of burn, 30 patients received < 200 mL/kg and 11 received > 200 mL/kg of total resuscitation fluids, with a median total body surface area (TBSA) of 20.0.
• The primary outcome assessed was the worsening of neurologic findings on imaging related to the volume of the resuscitation fluid administered; the secondary outcomes were the incidence of new or worsening intracranial abnormalities, including hemorrhage, edema, ischemia, or infarction.

TAKEAWAY:

• Neurologic findings worsened in 47.6% patients receiving < 200 mL/kg of fluid resuscitation and 85.7% of those receiving > 200 mL/kg (P =.064).
• Repeat imaging was performed in 21 (70.0%) patients receiving < 200 mL/kg and 7 (63.6%) patients receiving > 200 mL/kg of resuscitation who underwent follow-up imaging.
• The median TBSA was 16.5 in the < 200 mL/kg group and 53.2 in the > 200 mL/kg group (P <.001).
• Intracranial abnormalities were found in 31.3% patients with hemorrhage, 18.8% with worsening edema, and 43.8% with ischemia or infarction.

IN PRACTICE:

“Patients who received over 200 mL/kg of resuscitation had an increased progression of intracranial abnormalities when compared with patients receiving less volume resuscitation,” the authors wrote. “Neurologic changes prompting imaging in burn patients may be undetectable, and our study further highlights the need for routine evaluation with neurologic imaging when undergoing large-volume resuscitations.”

SOURCE:

The study was led by Connor L. Kenney, MD, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, and was published online on November 07, 2024, in the Journal of Surgical Research.

LIMITATIONS:

Study limitations included a small patient sample and unclear guidelines for obtaining head CT scans, making it difficult to distinguish between trauma-related brain changes and disease progression. Additionally, the study lacked data on hypotensive episodes and long-term neurologic outcomes.

DISCLOSURES:

This study did not receive any specific funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including artificial intelligence, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Patients receiving > 200 mL/kg of fluid resuscitation for burn injuries show higher rates of worsening neurologic findings on imaging, with follow-up scans showing deterioration in high-volume recipients compared with low-volume recipients.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers conducted a single-center review of 5176 patients with burn injuries who were admitted to a verified American Burn Association center (2003-2017); 622 of them underwent head CT within 96 hours of admission, and 83 showed intracranial abnormalities.
• Of 42 patients (mean age, 49.7 years; 80.5% men) who were admitted within 24 hours of burn, 30 patients received < 200 mL/kg and 11 received > 200 mL/kg of total resuscitation fluids, with a median total body surface area (TBSA) of 20.0.
• The primary outcome assessed was the worsening of neurologic findings on imaging related to the volume of the resuscitation fluid administered; the secondary outcomes were the incidence of new or worsening intracranial abnormalities, including hemorrhage, edema, ischemia, or infarction.

TAKEAWAY:

• Neurologic findings worsened in 47.6% patients receiving < 200 mL/kg of fluid resuscitation and 85.7% of those receiving > 200 mL/kg (P =.064).
• Repeat imaging was performed in 21 (70.0%) patients receiving < 200 mL/kg and 7 (63.6%) patients receiving > 200 mL/kg of resuscitation who underwent follow-up imaging.
• The median TBSA was 16.5 in the < 200 mL/kg group and 53.2 in the > 200 mL/kg group (P <.001).
• Intracranial abnormalities were found in 31.3% patients with hemorrhage, 18.8% with worsening edema, and 43.8% with ischemia or infarction.

IN PRACTICE:

“Patients who received over 200 mL/kg of resuscitation had an increased progression of intracranial abnormalities when compared with patients receiving less volume resuscitation,” the authors wrote. “Neurologic changes prompting imaging in burn patients may be undetectable, and our study further highlights the need for routine evaluation with neurologic imaging when undergoing large-volume resuscitations.”

SOURCE:

The study was led by Connor L. Kenney, MD, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, and was published online on November 07, 2024, in the Journal of Surgical Research.

LIMITATIONS:

Study limitations included a small patient sample and unclear guidelines for obtaining head CT scans, making it difficult to distinguish between trauma-related brain changes and disease progression. Additionally, the study lacked data on hypotensive episodes and long-term neurologic outcomes.

DISCLOSURES:

This study did not receive any specific funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including artificial intelligence, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

This video transcript has been edited for clarity. 

Robert D. Glatter, MD: Hi and welcome. I’m Dr. Robert Glatter, medical adviser for Medscape Emergency Medicine. Joining me today to discuss a novel, plant-based approach to stopping moderate to severe bleeding is Joe Landolina, CEO and cofounder of Cresilon. Welcome, Joe. 

Joe Landolina, MS: Thank you so much for taking the time. It’s great to be here.

Educational Background and Inception of Cresilon

Glatter: It’s a pleasure to have you join me, and I want to congratulate you on your recent 510(k) FDA clearance for your novel product to save lives and stop bleeding. To begin with, can you explain how the idea for launching your company came about? 

Landolina: The way that Cresilon came about was a little bit unorthodox, because I was 17 years old when I invented the technology behind the product that eventually became Traumagel®. 

My grandfather was an ex-pharmaceutical executive, who later in life started a vineyard. I grew up on a vineyard with a winery chemistry lab across the street from my house and a grandfather who learned lab safety in the 60s. So, that meant that the day I learned how to walk, I was tossed into a lab and I fell head over heels in love with lab research.

That started experimentation and my academic pursuits. That led to discovering a blend of two plant-based polymers derived from algae that stop bleeding on contact, effectively creating a mechanical barrier and allowing anything from a gunshot wound to anything quite a bit more minor to stop in a matter of seconds.

Glatter: Your background is in biomedical engineering. How is it that you started tinkering and doing all this type of work? 

Landolina: That’s correct. I did my undergrad in chemical engineering, and my graduate studies were in biomedical engineering. For me, that was supposed to be a pathway into medical school. I always wanted to be a surgeon myself, and I love the field of medicine. 

As a freshman in college at NYU Engineering, I had this idea. I entered it into NYU’s business plan competition, and we won at the engineering school. That gave us just enough capital to start developing and researching Traumagel more, and Cresilon was born out of that research.

 

Techniques for Stopping Hemorrhage

Glatter: In terms of stopping hemorrhage, which takes so many lives in the United States and globally — certainly, uncontrolled hemorrhage — what are the techniques that you see, prior to the arrival of your product, as being effective? Can you elucidate some of these techniques? 

Landolina: In emergency medicine, the primary mode of controlling hemorrhage is passive. It’s what, in Brooklyn, we like to call “pressure and a prayer”, where you have a material that’s either gauze or an impregnated gauze in most cases, where the mode of action is absorbing blood, with the adjunct of pressure by the first responder or by the clinician who’s providing aid.

The idea is to stop the flow of blood to concentrate blood factors at the surface of the gauze product, and to promote either platelet activation or the production of fibrin to create a clot. 

These types of technologies are widespread. There are many versions of this technology carried by EMS agencies, trauma bays, US military soldiers, and soldiers across NATO countries. But these types of technologies tend to be relatively inefficient, meaning that they’re very difficult to get into wounds because of the gauze or the powder form of the devices, and it’s very hard to get them in contact with the form of bleeding.

On top of that, if the patient is clotting compromised or immunocompromised in some way, the ability to create a durable clot that will not be ripped off when you remove the product at the next level of care is also of concern. And so, this type of technology or the type of treatment of massive hemorrhage hasn’t changed in decades.

 

Current Applications and Potential Use

Glatter: I envision this product will be carried by paramedics, used on the battlefield at some point after your FDA clearance, and recently it went through.

Do you see any possibility that this could be an AED equivalent to Stop the Bleed? In other words, could the average lay person be trained to use your product if kits are available? 

Landolina: To be very clear, Traumagel today is only approved or cleared under a “prescription-only” indication, which means that it will not initially be available OTC. However, that is our goal. Our goal is to make this product available and usable by someone with no medical training whatsoever. 

The form factor of being a gel in a syringe lends itself well to that, meaning that we try to make it as easy as point and shoot to control hemorrhage, where there’s not as much technique to be learned in the application of a product like Traumagel as there is in current hemorrhage control techniques. 

 

Mechanism of Action and Physiology

Glatter: Once you apply Traumagel, can you explain what happens to the product after it’s applied and the bleeding has stopped? Does it get reabsorbed by the body? What’s the process here? 

Landolina: Under Traumagel’s indication, because it’s used in traumatic injury, it must be removed within 24 hours.

One of the big benefits of Traumagel is that when the patient produces a blood clot underneath Traumagel, it doesn’t become incorporated within the gel itself. To contrast that with the use of gauze, gauze is porous. The clot ends up wrapped around the fibers of the gauze, so if you peel the gauze away, it’s very likely that clot is coming off with it. The surgeon or the clinician at the next level of care is going to have to deal with the re-bleed. 

You can remove Traumagel cleanly and entirely without disturbing the underlying clot. That’s a major benefit, not only to the patient but also to the next level of care, to the next clinician or physician that is required to remove the product.

Glatter: How is it possible to remove the substance without disturbing the clot? Can you explain in more detail? 

Landolina: That’s one of the hallmarks of these plant-based polymers and the way that we design Traumagel itself. Traumagel is completely nonporous, and it has no fibrous nature to it. What that means is when the patient produces a blood clot or fibrin next to or on top of Traumagel, that fibrin ends up not incorporated within the polymers of Traumagel itself. 

Over time, because Traumagel is a hydrogel, meaning that by weight it’s mostly water, you end up having less adhesion to the clot over time. When it’s time to remove Traumagel from the injury, it has lost almost all of its adhesive capabilities, meaning that when you peel it away, that clot is going to stick better to tissue than it will to the gel itself. 

Glatter: Can you explain a little bit about the matrix that’s formed, the physiology, and how the polymers work to form this matrix? 

Landolina: Sure. Traumagel is made of two polysaccharides that are plant derived. One polysaccharide is polyanionic, and the other is polycationic, meaning one has negative charges and the other has positive charges, which together create almost a Lego block effect, where when the material comes in contact with tissue, it adheres strongly and allows for itself to effectively create a mechanical barrier against bleeding.

Courtesy of Cresilon

Landolina: Even in the face of major arterial blood flow, Traumagel will stay where it needs to stay, and it’s not going to get washed away. This means that it is much more easily appliable to these types of surfaces and will allow the patient to produce their own endogenous fibrin clot at that location.

Like I mentioned before, when that fibrin clot is formed, because the gel itself has no pores or fibers, it doesn’t become incorporated within the fibrin clot. You can take the gel away, leaving that clot behind without the chance of a rebleed.

 

Testing With Major Bleeds

Glatter: In terms of bleeding itself, have you tested your product with major aortic bleeds or carotid bleeds in preclinical work?

Landolina: We have used the US military’s model for lethal hemorrhage, and the idea there is to create a model that is just that — lethal. These are the worst types of bleeds that you can possibly imagine, where the patients are clotting compromised, and where you have, in most cases, a very strong arterial component, so something like a femoral artery bleed.

We’ve also tested in carotid artery, aortic applications, as well as combinations of venous and arterial bleeds. The idea here is to show the use of the product in the absolute worst-case scenario so that when this translates into the clinic, the models that we’ve used for evaluation, hopefully, are worse than what actually rolls into the trauma bay.

Glatter: Excellent. What’s the mean time to stop an arterial vs a venous bleed? Are we talking a matter of seconds?

Landolina: In the case of a healthy patient, meaning a patient without clotting compromise, you’re in a matter of seconds. It’s less than 10 seconds. 

In the case where you have clotting compromise, a deep, complicated wound geometry, we recommend holding a pressure bandage on for 3 minutes just because it increases the chance of Traumagel coming into contact with the bleed, especially when you can’t visualize the bleed in the bleed source. Because of that pressure time, that becomes the mean. But again, it’s highly dependent on the type of bleed and the style of application.

 

Failure Rates and Effectiveness

Glatter: As a segue to that, what is the failure rate based on your studies and internal research using Traumagel? Have there been cases where bleeding has not been able to be stopped? 

Landolina: It depends on the study, but the failure rates are incredibly low with Traumagel, assuming that it’s correctly used. That’s one of the benefits to this product, where with proper technique, with overwrap with gauze, you nearly always get control of hemorrhage with a product like this. 

Glatter: Is manual pressure required in that sense? From what you described earlier, manual pressure would not be required. 

Landolina: It depends on the injury. What we recommend is that, if you have a very deep wound where you cannot visualize the source of bleed, you use pressure to seat Traumagel into the source of bleeding, meaning that you’re following Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (Co-TCCC) regulations or requirements, where you’re over wrapping with gauze, and you’re providing a pressure wrapping to ensure that the Traumagel is in contact with the bleed while it’s doing what it’s doing. 

In most cases, it doesn’t hurt to apply pressure on top of Traumagel as well. In more surface level bleeds, you don’t need pressure at all. 

 

Applications Beyond Trauma

Glatter: Interesting. In terms of further applications (eg, nose bleeds or GYN bleeding, which are life-threatening), do you see this coming as an application for the future? 

Landolina: That’s where we’re working. Traumagel is the successor to an animal health product called Vetigel. The formulations of the gel behind Vetigel and Traumagel are identical. Vetigel has a full surgical indication, and that’s everything from epistaxis to neuro and spine procedures, into cardiovascular and soft tissue surgeries, orthopedic medicine, and so on.

Cresilon’s goal is to eventually expand the indication of our technology to include surgical indications and other indications where we can help any patient that’s bleeding. 

Glatter: That’s important, because we use prehospital whole blood, low titer, specifically, when patients have life-threatening hemorrhage. With your product, that would reduce the amount of blood products that would need to be administered. This could be a real game changer. 

Landolina: Definitely, that’s the goal we’re working on. 

Infection Risks and Biocompatibility

Glatter: In terms of any risk for infection, has that been studied as well? Does Traumagel in any way lead to increased rates of infection?

Landolina: Traumagel is biocompatible. It’s a sterile product. We’ve done the full suite of biocompatibility testing as required by FDA. On top of that, remember that Vetigel, which is the same formulation, is an implantable product. As a result, that has even extended biocompatibility testing beyond what would be necessary for an external product.

In Vetigel’s use case, which has been used now in over 60,000 patients, primarily companion animals, dogs and cats, we haven’t seen instances of infection. There’s no reason to believe that we would see that clinically with Traumagel.

 

Research Collaborations and Future Applications

Glatter: In terms of other research that your company’s embarked on preclinically, I understand there were some studies done at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. I was wondering if you could expand on these, specifically, in terms of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and hemorrhage related to that. For example, with shrapnel or even a gunshot wound. 

Landolina: The Walter Reed collaboration with Cresilon is something that I’m particularly excited about, because it marks Cresilon’s first project that’s outside the scope of just hemostasis. Walter Reed came to us with this proposal where there’s a big challenge in a subset of TBI called penetrating ballistic-like brain injury, where the brain has been penetrated by a bullet, shrapnel, or some other projectile, and there’s an injury that exposes the brain to the outside. 

Today, there is no standard of care to treat patients with those types of injuries. In many cases, mortality is caused through swelling of the brain, or collapse of the brain. What they came to us with was the potential of using our technology, not primarily as a hemostatic agent, but to be able to stabilize that patient enough to get to the next level of care to be treated by a neurosurgeon.

That study Walter Reed did was just a pilot that was done in small animals. In that pilot, they showed that over the period of treatment, there was no negative change in vital signs, no increase in edema or in swelling, or in any of the biomarkers that were being monitored at that time. 

At the very least, this is not full indication that this indication will work for Cresilon, but it shows that there’s promise. It’s something that we’re working on and hopefully we’ll be able to bring to market soon.

Glatter: Certainly, maintaining intracranial pressure and cerebral perfusion pressures are very critical. In the future, do you think this product would be able to be deployed endovascularly? Imagine this in terms of stopping bleeding from some source, whether it’s from a stroke or another intracranial source. 

Landolina: That’s been an area of interest for us. We have no evidence to prove that indication works at this point, but there’s also nothing to say that it wouldn’t be possible for our technology. At this point, we’ve only looked at a cursory level at those indications. 

Glatter: Does the use of Traumagel obviate the need for a more definitive repair (eg, with sutures) or something that’s more permanent?

Landolina: I always say that Traumagel — and Vetigel, for that matter — is not a replacement for good surgical technique. The surgeon always needs to make his or her best judgment when reviewing the patient. That doesn’t mean that there won’t need to be sutures or vascular repair in most of these cases, especially in major trauma.

Final Takeaways

Glatter: Do you have some bullet points or pearls you could give our audience as a takeaway? 

Landolina: When Cresilon looks at Traumagel — and for us, Traumagel is the next generation of hemostatic agent, especially in trauma care and in emergency medicine — it allows for a far-simplified application of the product and much faster control of hemorrhage with better patient outcomes.

As we roll this out through EMS agencies, trauma hospitals, military agencies, and eventually to the general public through a future indication, it’s something we’re very excited about. Personally, I started this business 14 years ago, and so it’s great to see our mission of saving lives transitioning to saving human lives.

Glatter: I look forward to seeing this product in the emergency department, but also in other settings, such as in the operating room where we can really help patients who are dying from hemorrhage, certainly on the battlefield, and the lay public. If someone were to come upon a patient who’s bleeding out, this could be certainly a game changer and a lifesaver. 

I want to thank you for your time. This is a really important product that’s transformed the lives of so many animals, but also people in the future.

Dr. Glatter is an assistant professor of emergency medicine at Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell in Hempstead, New York. He reported no relevant conflicts of interest. Mr. Landolina is the CEO and co-founder of Cresilon, a biotechnology company specializing in plant-based solutions for emergency bleeding control.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

This video transcript has been edited for clarity. 

Robert D. Glatter, MD: Hi and welcome. I’m Dr. Robert Glatter, medical adviser for Medscape Emergency Medicine. Joining me today to discuss a novel, plant-based approach to stopping moderate to severe bleeding is Joe Landolina, CEO and cofounder of Cresilon. Welcome, Joe. 

Joe Landolina, MS: Thank you so much for taking the time. It’s great to be here.

Educational Background and Inception of Cresilon

Glatter: It’s a pleasure to have you join me, and I want to congratulate you on your recent 510(k) FDA clearance for your novel product to save lives and stop bleeding. To begin with, can you explain how the idea for launching your company came about? 

Landolina: The way that Cresilon came about was a little bit unorthodox, because I was 17 years old when I invented the technology behind the product that eventually became Traumagel®. 

My grandfather was an ex-pharmaceutical executive, who later in life started a vineyard. I grew up on a vineyard with a winery chemistry lab across the street from my house and a grandfather who learned lab safety in the 60s. So, that meant that the day I learned how to walk, I was tossed into a lab and I fell head over heels in love with lab research.

That started experimentation and my academic pursuits. That led to discovering a blend of two plant-based polymers derived from algae that stop bleeding on contact, effectively creating a mechanical barrier and allowing anything from a gunshot wound to anything quite a bit more minor to stop in a matter of seconds.

Glatter: Your background is in biomedical engineering. How is it that you started tinkering and doing all this type of work? 

Landolina: That’s correct. I did my undergrad in chemical engineering, and my graduate studies were in biomedical engineering. For me, that was supposed to be a pathway into medical school. I always wanted to be a surgeon myself, and I love the field of medicine. 

As a freshman in college at NYU Engineering, I had this idea. I entered it into NYU’s business plan competition, and we won at the engineering school. That gave us just enough capital to start developing and researching Traumagel more, and Cresilon was born out of that research.

 

Techniques for Stopping Hemorrhage

Glatter: In terms of stopping hemorrhage, which takes so many lives in the United States and globally — certainly, uncontrolled hemorrhage — what are the techniques that you see, prior to the arrival of your product, as being effective? Can you elucidate some of these techniques? 

Landolina: In emergency medicine, the primary mode of controlling hemorrhage is passive. It’s what, in Brooklyn, we like to call “pressure and a prayer”, where you have a material that’s either gauze or an impregnated gauze in most cases, where the mode of action is absorbing blood, with the adjunct of pressure by the first responder or by the clinician who’s providing aid.

The idea is to stop the flow of blood to concentrate blood factors at the surface of the gauze product, and to promote either platelet activation or the production of fibrin to create a clot. 

These types of technologies are widespread. There are many versions of this technology carried by EMS agencies, trauma bays, US military soldiers, and soldiers across NATO countries. But these types of technologies tend to be relatively inefficient, meaning that they’re very difficult to get into wounds because of the gauze or the powder form of the devices, and it’s very hard to get them in contact with the form of bleeding.

On top of that, if the patient is clotting compromised or immunocompromised in some way, the ability to create a durable clot that will not be ripped off when you remove the product at the next level of care is also of concern. And so, this type of technology or the type of treatment of massive hemorrhage hasn’t changed in decades.

 

Current Applications and Potential Use

Glatter: I envision this product will be carried by paramedics, used on the battlefield at some point after your FDA clearance, and recently it went through.

Do you see any possibility that this could be an AED equivalent to Stop the Bleed? In other words, could the average lay person be trained to use your product if kits are available? 

Landolina: To be very clear, Traumagel today is only approved or cleared under a “prescription-only” indication, which means that it will not initially be available OTC. However, that is our goal. Our goal is to make this product available and usable by someone with no medical training whatsoever. 

The form factor of being a gel in a syringe lends itself well to that, meaning that we try to make it as easy as point and shoot to control hemorrhage, where there’s not as much technique to be learned in the application of a product like Traumagel as there is in current hemorrhage control techniques. 

 

Mechanism of Action and Physiology

Glatter: Once you apply Traumagel, can you explain what happens to the product after it’s applied and the bleeding has stopped? Does it get reabsorbed by the body? What’s the process here? 

Landolina: Under Traumagel’s indication, because it’s used in traumatic injury, it must be removed within 24 hours.

One of the big benefits of Traumagel is that when the patient produces a blood clot underneath Traumagel, it doesn’t become incorporated within the gel itself. To contrast that with the use of gauze, gauze is porous. The clot ends up wrapped around the fibers of the gauze, so if you peel the gauze away, it’s very likely that clot is coming off with it. The surgeon or the clinician at the next level of care is going to have to deal with the re-bleed. 

You can remove Traumagel cleanly and entirely without disturbing the underlying clot. That’s a major benefit, not only to the patient but also to the next level of care, to the next clinician or physician that is required to remove the product.

Glatter: How is it possible to remove the substance without disturbing the clot? Can you explain in more detail? 

Landolina: That’s one of the hallmarks of these plant-based polymers and the way that we design Traumagel itself. Traumagel is completely nonporous, and it has no fibrous nature to it. What that means is when the patient produces a blood clot or fibrin next to or on top of Traumagel, that fibrin ends up not incorporated within the polymers of Traumagel itself. 

Over time, because Traumagel is a hydrogel, meaning that by weight it’s mostly water, you end up having less adhesion to the clot over time. When it’s time to remove Traumagel from the injury, it has lost almost all of its adhesive capabilities, meaning that when you peel it away, that clot is going to stick better to tissue than it will to the gel itself. 

Glatter: Can you explain a little bit about the matrix that’s formed, the physiology, and how the polymers work to form this matrix? 

Landolina: Sure. Traumagel is made of two polysaccharides that are plant derived. One polysaccharide is polyanionic, and the other is polycationic, meaning one has negative charges and the other has positive charges, which together create almost a Lego block effect, where when the material comes in contact with tissue, it adheres strongly and allows for itself to effectively create a mechanical barrier against bleeding.

Courtesy of Cresilon

Landolina: Even in the face of major arterial blood flow, Traumagel will stay where it needs to stay, and it’s not going to get washed away. This means that it is much more easily appliable to these types of surfaces and will allow the patient to produce their own endogenous fibrin clot at that location.

Like I mentioned before, when that fibrin clot is formed, because the gel itself has no pores or fibers, it doesn’t become incorporated within the fibrin clot. You can take the gel away, leaving that clot behind without the chance of a rebleed.

 

Testing With Major Bleeds

Glatter: In terms of bleeding itself, have you tested your product with major aortic bleeds or carotid bleeds in preclinical work?

Landolina: We have used the US military’s model for lethal hemorrhage, and the idea there is to create a model that is just that — lethal. These are the worst types of bleeds that you can possibly imagine, where the patients are clotting compromised, and where you have, in most cases, a very strong arterial component, so something like a femoral artery bleed.

We’ve also tested in carotid artery, aortic applications, as well as combinations of venous and arterial bleeds. The idea here is to show the use of the product in the absolute worst-case scenario so that when this translates into the clinic, the models that we’ve used for evaluation, hopefully, are worse than what actually rolls into the trauma bay.

Glatter: Excellent. What’s the mean time to stop an arterial vs a venous bleed? Are we talking a matter of seconds?

Landolina: In the case of a healthy patient, meaning a patient without clotting compromise, you’re in a matter of seconds. It’s less than 10 seconds. 

In the case where you have clotting compromise, a deep, complicated wound geometry, we recommend holding a pressure bandage on for 3 minutes just because it increases the chance of Traumagel coming into contact with the bleed, especially when you can’t visualize the bleed in the bleed source. Because of that pressure time, that becomes the mean. But again, it’s highly dependent on the type of bleed and the style of application.

 

Failure Rates and Effectiveness

Glatter: As a segue to that, what is the failure rate based on your studies and internal research using Traumagel? Have there been cases where bleeding has not been able to be stopped? 

Landolina: It depends on the study, but the failure rates are incredibly low with Traumagel, assuming that it’s correctly used. That’s one of the benefits to this product, where with proper technique, with overwrap with gauze, you nearly always get control of hemorrhage with a product like this. 

Glatter: Is manual pressure required in that sense? From what you described earlier, manual pressure would not be required. 

Landolina: It depends on the injury. What we recommend is that, if you have a very deep wound where you cannot visualize the source of bleed, you use pressure to seat Traumagel into the source of bleeding, meaning that you’re following Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (Co-TCCC) regulations or requirements, where you’re over wrapping with gauze, and you’re providing a pressure wrapping to ensure that the Traumagel is in contact with the bleed while it’s doing what it’s doing. 

In most cases, it doesn’t hurt to apply pressure on top of Traumagel as well. In more surface level bleeds, you don’t need pressure at all. 

 

Applications Beyond Trauma

Glatter: Interesting. In terms of further applications (eg, nose bleeds or GYN bleeding, which are life-threatening), do you see this coming as an application for the future? 

Landolina: That’s where we’re working. Traumagel is the successor to an animal health product called Vetigel. The formulations of the gel behind Vetigel and Traumagel are identical. Vetigel has a full surgical indication, and that’s everything from epistaxis to neuro and spine procedures, into cardiovascular and soft tissue surgeries, orthopedic medicine, and so on.

Cresilon’s goal is to eventually expand the indication of our technology to include surgical indications and other indications where we can help any patient that’s bleeding. 

Glatter: That’s important, because we use prehospital whole blood, low titer, specifically, when patients have life-threatening hemorrhage. With your product, that would reduce the amount of blood products that would need to be administered. This could be a real game changer. 

Landolina: Definitely, that’s the goal we’re working on. 

Infection Risks and Biocompatibility

Glatter: In terms of any risk for infection, has that been studied as well? Does Traumagel in any way lead to increased rates of infection?

Landolina: Traumagel is biocompatible. It’s a sterile product. We’ve done the full suite of biocompatibility testing as required by FDA. On top of that, remember that Vetigel, which is the same formulation, is an implantable product. As a result, that has even extended biocompatibility testing beyond what would be necessary for an external product.

In Vetigel’s use case, which has been used now in over 60,000 patients, primarily companion animals, dogs and cats, we haven’t seen instances of infection. There’s no reason to believe that we would see that clinically with Traumagel.

 

Research Collaborations and Future Applications

Glatter: In terms of other research that your company’s embarked on preclinically, I understand there were some studies done at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. I was wondering if you could expand on these, specifically, in terms of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and hemorrhage related to that. For example, with shrapnel or even a gunshot wound. 

Landolina: The Walter Reed collaboration with Cresilon is something that I’m particularly excited about, because it marks Cresilon’s first project that’s outside the scope of just hemostasis. Walter Reed came to us with this proposal where there’s a big challenge in a subset of TBI called penetrating ballistic-like brain injury, where the brain has been penetrated by a bullet, shrapnel, or some other projectile, and there’s an injury that exposes the brain to the outside. 

Today, there is no standard of care to treat patients with those types of injuries. In many cases, mortality is caused through swelling of the brain, or collapse of the brain. What they came to us with was the potential of using our technology, not primarily as a hemostatic agent, but to be able to stabilize that patient enough to get to the next level of care to be treated by a neurosurgeon.

That study Walter Reed did was just a pilot that was done in small animals. In that pilot, they showed that over the period of treatment, there was no negative change in vital signs, no increase in edema or in swelling, or in any of the biomarkers that were being monitored at that time. 

At the very least, this is not full indication that this indication will work for Cresilon, but it shows that there’s promise. It’s something that we’re working on and hopefully we’ll be able to bring to market soon.

Glatter: Certainly, maintaining intracranial pressure and cerebral perfusion pressures are very critical. In the future, do you think this product would be able to be deployed endovascularly? Imagine this in terms of stopping bleeding from some source, whether it’s from a stroke or another intracranial source. 

Landolina: That’s been an area of interest for us. We have no evidence to prove that indication works at this point, but there’s also nothing to say that it wouldn’t be possible for our technology. At this point, we’ve only looked at a cursory level at those indications. 

Glatter: Does the use of Traumagel obviate the need for a more definitive repair (eg, with sutures) or something that’s more permanent?

Landolina: I always say that Traumagel — and Vetigel, for that matter — is not a replacement for good surgical technique. The surgeon always needs to make his or her best judgment when reviewing the patient. That doesn’t mean that there won’t need to be sutures or vascular repair in most of these cases, especially in major trauma.

Final Takeaways

Glatter: Do you have some bullet points or pearls you could give our audience as a takeaway? 

Landolina: When Cresilon looks at Traumagel — and for us, Traumagel is the next generation of hemostatic agent, especially in trauma care and in emergency medicine — it allows for a far-simplified application of the product and much faster control of hemorrhage with better patient outcomes.

As we roll this out through EMS agencies, trauma hospitals, military agencies, and eventually to the general public through a future indication, it’s something we’re very excited about. Personally, I started this business 14 years ago, and so it’s great to see our mission of saving lives transitioning to saving human lives.

Glatter: I look forward to seeing this product in the emergency department, but also in other settings, such as in the operating room where we can really help patients who are dying from hemorrhage, certainly on the battlefield, and the lay public. If someone were to come upon a patient who’s bleeding out, this could be certainly a game changer and a lifesaver. 

I want to thank you for your time. This is a really important product that’s transformed the lives of so many animals, but also people in the future.

Dr. Glatter is an assistant professor of emergency medicine at Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell in Hempstead, New York. He reported no relevant conflicts of interest. Mr. Landolina is the CEO and co-founder of Cresilon, a biotechnology company specializing in plant-based solutions for emergency bleeding control.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

This video transcript has been edited for clarity. 

Robert D. Glatter, MD: Hi and welcome. I’m Dr. Robert Glatter, medical adviser for Medscape Emergency Medicine. Joining me today to discuss a novel, plant-based approach to stopping moderate to severe bleeding is Joe Landolina, CEO and cofounder of Cresilon. Welcome, Joe. 

Joe Landolina, MS: Thank you so much for taking the time. It’s great to be here.

Educational Background and Inception of Cresilon

Glatter: It’s a pleasure to have you join me, and I want to congratulate you on your recent 510(k) FDA clearance for your novel product to save lives and stop bleeding. To begin with, can you explain how the idea for launching your company came about? 

Landolina: The way that Cresilon came about was a little bit unorthodox, because I was 17 years old when I invented the technology behind the product that eventually became Traumagel®. 

My grandfather was an ex-pharmaceutical executive, who later in life started a vineyard. I grew up on a vineyard with a winery chemistry lab across the street from my house and a grandfather who learned lab safety in the 60s. So, that meant that the day I learned how to walk, I was tossed into a lab and I fell head over heels in love with lab research.

That started experimentation and my academic pursuits. That led to discovering a blend of two plant-based polymers derived from algae that stop bleeding on contact, effectively creating a mechanical barrier and allowing anything from a gunshot wound to anything quite a bit more minor to stop in a matter of seconds.

Glatter: Your background is in biomedical engineering. How is it that you started tinkering and doing all this type of work? 

Landolina: That’s correct. I did my undergrad in chemical engineering, and my graduate studies were in biomedical engineering. For me, that was supposed to be a pathway into medical school. I always wanted to be a surgeon myself, and I love the field of medicine. 

As a freshman in college at NYU Engineering, I had this idea. I entered it into NYU’s business plan competition, and we won at the engineering school. That gave us just enough capital to start developing and researching Traumagel more, and Cresilon was born out of that research.

 

Techniques for Stopping Hemorrhage

Glatter: In terms of stopping hemorrhage, which takes so many lives in the United States and globally — certainly, uncontrolled hemorrhage — what are the techniques that you see, prior to the arrival of your product, as being effective? Can you elucidate some of these techniques? 

Landolina: In emergency medicine, the primary mode of controlling hemorrhage is passive. It’s what, in Brooklyn, we like to call “pressure and a prayer”, where you have a material that’s either gauze or an impregnated gauze in most cases, where the mode of action is absorbing blood, with the adjunct of pressure by the first responder or by the clinician who’s providing aid.

The idea is to stop the flow of blood to concentrate blood factors at the surface of the gauze product, and to promote either platelet activation or the production of fibrin to create a clot. 

These types of technologies are widespread. There are many versions of this technology carried by EMS agencies, trauma bays, US military soldiers, and soldiers across NATO countries. But these types of technologies tend to be relatively inefficient, meaning that they’re very difficult to get into wounds because of the gauze or the powder form of the devices, and it’s very hard to get them in contact with the form of bleeding.

On top of that, if the patient is clotting compromised or immunocompromised in some way, the ability to create a durable clot that will not be ripped off when you remove the product at the next level of care is also of concern. And so, this type of technology or the type of treatment of massive hemorrhage hasn’t changed in decades.

 

Current Applications and Potential Use

Glatter: I envision this product will be carried by paramedics, used on the battlefield at some point after your FDA clearance, and recently it went through.

Do you see any possibility that this could be an AED equivalent to Stop the Bleed? In other words, could the average lay person be trained to use your product if kits are available? 

Landolina: To be very clear, Traumagel today is only approved or cleared under a “prescription-only” indication, which means that it will not initially be available OTC. However, that is our goal. Our goal is to make this product available and usable by someone with no medical training whatsoever. 

The form factor of being a gel in a syringe lends itself well to that, meaning that we try to make it as easy as point and shoot to control hemorrhage, where there’s not as much technique to be learned in the application of a product like Traumagel as there is in current hemorrhage control techniques. 

 

Mechanism of Action and Physiology

Glatter: Once you apply Traumagel, can you explain what happens to the product after it’s applied and the bleeding has stopped? Does it get reabsorbed by the body? What’s the process here? 

Landolina: Under Traumagel’s indication, because it’s used in traumatic injury, it must be removed within 24 hours.

One of the big benefits of Traumagel is that when the patient produces a blood clot underneath Traumagel, it doesn’t become incorporated within the gel itself. To contrast that with the use of gauze, gauze is porous. The clot ends up wrapped around the fibers of the gauze, so if you peel the gauze away, it’s very likely that clot is coming off with it. The surgeon or the clinician at the next level of care is going to have to deal with the re-bleed. 

You can remove Traumagel cleanly and entirely without disturbing the underlying clot. That’s a major benefit, not only to the patient but also to the next level of care, to the next clinician or physician that is required to remove the product.

Glatter: How is it possible to remove the substance without disturbing the clot? Can you explain in more detail? 

Landolina: That’s one of the hallmarks of these plant-based polymers and the way that we design Traumagel itself. Traumagel is completely nonporous, and it has no fibrous nature to it. What that means is when the patient produces a blood clot or fibrin next to or on top of Traumagel, that fibrin ends up not incorporated within the polymers of Traumagel itself. 

Over time, because Traumagel is a hydrogel, meaning that by weight it’s mostly water, you end up having less adhesion to the clot over time. When it’s time to remove Traumagel from the injury, it has lost almost all of its adhesive capabilities, meaning that when you peel it away, that clot is going to stick better to tissue than it will to the gel itself. 

Glatter: Can you explain a little bit about the matrix that’s formed, the physiology, and how the polymers work to form this matrix? 

Landolina: Sure. Traumagel is made of two polysaccharides that are plant derived. One polysaccharide is polyanionic, and the other is polycationic, meaning one has negative charges and the other has positive charges, which together create almost a Lego block effect, where when the material comes in contact with tissue, it adheres strongly and allows for itself to effectively create a mechanical barrier against bleeding.

Courtesy of Cresilon

Landolina: Even in the face of major arterial blood flow, Traumagel will stay where it needs to stay, and it’s not going to get washed away. This means that it is much more easily appliable to these types of surfaces and will allow the patient to produce their own endogenous fibrin clot at that location.

Like I mentioned before, when that fibrin clot is formed, because the gel itself has no pores or fibers, it doesn’t become incorporated within the fibrin clot. You can take the gel away, leaving that clot behind without the chance of a rebleed.

 

Testing With Major Bleeds

Glatter: In terms of bleeding itself, have you tested your product with major aortic bleeds or carotid bleeds in preclinical work?

Landolina: We have used the US military’s model for lethal hemorrhage, and the idea there is to create a model that is just that — lethal. These are the worst types of bleeds that you can possibly imagine, where the patients are clotting compromised, and where you have, in most cases, a very strong arterial component, so something like a femoral artery bleed.

We’ve also tested in carotid artery, aortic applications, as well as combinations of venous and arterial bleeds. The idea here is to show the use of the product in the absolute worst-case scenario so that when this translates into the clinic, the models that we’ve used for evaluation, hopefully, are worse than what actually rolls into the trauma bay.

Glatter: Excellent. What’s the mean time to stop an arterial vs a venous bleed? Are we talking a matter of seconds?

Landolina: In the case of a healthy patient, meaning a patient without clotting compromise, you’re in a matter of seconds. It’s less than 10 seconds. 

In the case where you have clotting compromise, a deep, complicated wound geometry, we recommend holding a pressure bandage on for 3 minutes just because it increases the chance of Traumagel coming into contact with the bleed, especially when you can’t visualize the bleed in the bleed source. Because of that pressure time, that becomes the mean. But again, it’s highly dependent on the type of bleed and the style of application.

 

Failure Rates and Effectiveness

Glatter: As a segue to that, what is the failure rate based on your studies and internal research using Traumagel? Have there been cases where bleeding has not been able to be stopped? 

Landolina: It depends on the study, but the failure rates are incredibly low with Traumagel, assuming that it’s correctly used. That’s one of the benefits to this product, where with proper technique, with overwrap with gauze, you nearly always get control of hemorrhage with a product like this. 

Glatter: Is manual pressure required in that sense? From what you described earlier, manual pressure would not be required. 

Landolina: It depends on the injury. What we recommend is that, if you have a very deep wound where you cannot visualize the source of bleed, you use pressure to seat Traumagel into the source of bleeding, meaning that you’re following Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (Co-TCCC) regulations or requirements, where you’re over wrapping with gauze, and you’re providing a pressure wrapping to ensure that the Traumagel is in contact with the bleed while it’s doing what it’s doing. 

In most cases, it doesn’t hurt to apply pressure on top of Traumagel as well. In more surface level bleeds, you don’t need pressure at all. 

 

Applications Beyond Trauma

Glatter: Interesting. In terms of further applications (eg, nose bleeds or GYN bleeding, which are life-threatening), do you see this coming as an application for the future? 

Landolina: That’s where we’re working. Traumagel is the successor to an animal health product called Vetigel. The formulations of the gel behind Vetigel and Traumagel are identical. Vetigel has a full surgical indication, and that’s everything from epistaxis to neuro and spine procedures, into cardiovascular and soft tissue surgeries, orthopedic medicine, and so on.

Cresilon’s goal is to eventually expand the indication of our technology to include surgical indications and other indications where we can help any patient that’s bleeding. 

Glatter: That’s important, because we use prehospital whole blood, low titer, specifically, when patients have life-threatening hemorrhage. With your product, that would reduce the amount of blood products that would need to be administered. This could be a real game changer. 

Landolina: Definitely, that’s the goal we’re working on. 

Infection Risks and Biocompatibility

Glatter: In terms of any risk for infection, has that been studied as well? Does Traumagel in any way lead to increased rates of infection?

Landolina: Traumagel is biocompatible. It’s a sterile product. We’ve done the full suite of biocompatibility testing as required by FDA. On top of that, remember that Vetigel, which is the same formulation, is an implantable product. As a result, that has even extended biocompatibility testing beyond what would be necessary for an external product.

In Vetigel’s use case, which has been used now in over 60,000 patients, primarily companion animals, dogs and cats, we haven’t seen instances of infection. There’s no reason to believe that we would see that clinically with Traumagel.

 

Research Collaborations and Future Applications

Glatter: In terms of other research that your company’s embarked on preclinically, I understand there were some studies done at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. I was wondering if you could expand on these, specifically, in terms of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and hemorrhage related to that. For example, with shrapnel or even a gunshot wound. 

Landolina: The Walter Reed collaboration with Cresilon is something that I’m particularly excited about, because it marks Cresilon’s first project that’s outside the scope of just hemostasis. Walter Reed came to us with this proposal where there’s a big challenge in a subset of TBI called penetrating ballistic-like brain injury, where the brain has been penetrated by a bullet, shrapnel, or some other projectile, and there’s an injury that exposes the brain to the outside. 

Today, there is no standard of care to treat patients with those types of injuries. In many cases, mortality is caused through swelling of the brain, or collapse of the brain. What they came to us with was the potential of using our technology, not primarily as a hemostatic agent, but to be able to stabilize that patient enough to get to the next level of care to be treated by a neurosurgeon.

That study Walter Reed did was just a pilot that was done in small animals. In that pilot, they showed that over the period of treatment, there was no negative change in vital signs, no increase in edema or in swelling, or in any of the biomarkers that were being monitored at that time. 

At the very least, this is not full indication that this indication will work for Cresilon, but it shows that there’s promise. It’s something that we’re working on and hopefully we’ll be able to bring to market soon.

Glatter: Certainly, maintaining intracranial pressure and cerebral perfusion pressures are very critical. In the future, do you think this product would be able to be deployed endovascularly? Imagine this in terms of stopping bleeding from some source, whether it’s from a stroke or another intracranial source. 

Landolina: That’s been an area of interest for us. We have no evidence to prove that indication works at this point, but there’s also nothing to say that it wouldn’t be possible for our technology. At this point, we’ve only looked at a cursory level at those indications. 

Glatter: Does the use of Traumagel obviate the need for a more definitive repair (eg, with sutures) or something that’s more permanent?

Landolina: I always say that Traumagel — and Vetigel, for that matter — is not a replacement for good surgical technique. The surgeon always needs to make his or her best judgment when reviewing the patient. That doesn’t mean that there won’t need to be sutures or vascular repair in most of these cases, especially in major trauma.

Final Takeaways

Glatter: Do you have some bullet points or pearls you could give our audience as a takeaway? 

Landolina: When Cresilon looks at Traumagel — and for us, Traumagel is the next generation of hemostatic agent, especially in trauma care and in emergency medicine — it allows for a far-simplified application of the product and much faster control of hemorrhage with better patient outcomes.

As we roll this out through EMS agencies, trauma hospitals, military agencies, and eventually to the general public through a future indication, it’s something we’re very excited about. Personally, I started this business 14 years ago, and so it’s great to see our mission of saving lives transitioning to saving human lives.

Glatter: I look forward to seeing this product in the emergency department, but also in other settings, such as in the operating room where we can really help patients who are dying from hemorrhage, certainly on the battlefield, and the lay public. If someone were to come upon a patient who’s bleeding out, this could be certainly a game changer and a lifesaver. 

I want to thank you for your time. This is a really important product that’s transformed the lives of so many animals, but also people in the future.

Dr. Glatter is an assistant professor of emergency medicine at Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell in Hempstead, New York. He reported no relevant conflicts of interest. Mr. Landolina is the CEO and co-founder of Cresilon, a biotechnology company specializing in plant-based solutions for emergency bleeding control.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

New recommendations on rescuing adults and children who have drowned include an important update for healthcare professionals, trained rescuers, and untrained lay rescuers. 

The American Heart Association (AHA) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) have issued recommendations that highlight delivering rescue breaths as well as calling 911 and performing chest compressions in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) as first steps when a person pulled from the water is in cardiac arrest.

This is the first collaboration between the two organizations on resuscitation after drowning. The recommendations were published simultaneously in Circulation and Pediatrics.

Included in the recommendations are two key principles:

• Anyone pulled from the water who has no signs of normal breathing or consciousness should be presumed to be in cardiac arrest.
• Rescuers should immediately start CPR that includes rescue breathing in addition to chest compressions. Multiple large studies show more people with cardiac arrest from noncardiac causes such as drowning survive when CPR includes rescue breaths, compared with hands-only CPR (calling 911 and pushing hard and fast in the center of the chest).

If someone is untrained, unwilling, or unable to give breaths, they can perform chest compressions until help arrives, the recommendations advise.

 

Reasoning Behind the Update

The authors, led by writing group cochair Tracy E. McCallin, MD, associate professor in the division of pediatric emergency medicine at Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital in Cleveland , Ohio, explained that drowning generally advances from initial respiratory arrest from submersion-related hypoxia to cardiac arrest, and therefore it can be difficult to distinguish respiratory arrest from cardiac arrest because pulses are difficult to accurately palpate within the recommended 10-second window.

“Therefore, resuscitation from cardiac arrest due to this specific circumstance must focus on restoring breathing as much as it does circulation,” the authors wrote.

Resuscitation after drowning may begin in the water with rescue breathing when safely provided by trained rescuers and should continue with chest compressions, once the drowned person and the rescuer are on land or in a boat, the report authors wrote.

“The focused update on drowning contains the most up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations on how to resuscitate someone who has drowned,” McCallin states in a press release.

In addition to the new guidance on rescue breaths, the update includes new topics that the AHA has not previously addressed with treatment recommendations, such as oxygen administration after drowning; automated external defibrillator use in cardiac arrest after drowning and public-access defibrillation programs.

 

Pediatricians Can Help Spread the Word

Alexandra Stern, MD, assistant professor in the Department of Pediatrics at University of Florida, Gainesville, who was not part of the update, said pediatricians can help disseminate this new information.

“Water safety is a topic frequently discussed as a pediatrician, with focus often being on primary prevention of drowning,” she said. “We stress the importance of the multiple layers of protection against drowning, such as touch supervision (staying within arm’s length); secure fencing, access to appropriate life jackets, and teaching our children to swim. Learning CPR is a large part of these measures and continuing these discussions with our patients and families is important.”

She added that updating the recommended procedures will likely require changes to all forms of education and community outreach regarding drowning from basic life support classes to more advanced lifeguard training. She noted that the update provides practical guidance not just for trained rescuers and healthcare professionals, but also for family members. 

The paper notes that drowning is the third leading cause of death from unintentional injury globally, accounting for 7% of all injury-related deaths. In the United States, drowning is the leading cause of death in children aged 1-4 years and the second leading cause of death from unintentional injury in children aged 5-14 years.

The update is based on systematic reviews from 2021 to 2023 performed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation related to the resuscitation of drowning.

The authors and Stern reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

New recommendations on rescuing adults and children who have drowned include an important update for healthcare professionals, trained rescuers, and untrained lay rescuers. 

The American Heart Association (AHA) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) have issued recommendations that highlight delivering rescue breaths as well as calling 911 and performing chest compressions in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) as first steps when a person pulled from the water is in cardiac arrest.

This is the first collaboration between the two organizations on resuscitation after drowning. The recommendations were published simultaneously in Circulation and Pediatrics.

Included in the recommendations are two key principles:

• Anyone pulled from the water who has no signs of normal breathing or consciousness should be presumed to be in cardiac arrest.
• Rescuers should immediately start CPR that includes rescue breathing in addition to chest compressions. Multiple large studies show more people with cardiac arrest from noncardiac causes such as drowning survive when CPR includes rescue breaths, compared with hands-only CPR (calling 911 and pushing hard and fast in the center of the chest).

If someone is untrained, unwilling, or unable to give breaths, they can perform chest compressions until help arrives, the recommendations advise.

 

Reasoning Behind the Update

The authors, led by writing group cochair Tracy E. McCallin, MD, associate professor in the division of pediatric emergency medicine at Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital in Cleveland , Ohio, explained that drowning generally advances from initial respiratory arrest from submersion-related hypoxia to cardiac arrest, and therefore it can be difficult to distinguish respiratory arrest from cardiac arrest because pulses are difficult to accurately palpate within the recommended 10-second window.

“Therefore, resuscitation from cardiac arrest due to this specific circumstance must focus on restoring breathing as much as it does circulation,” the authors wrote.

Resuscitation after drowning may begin in the water with rescue breathing when safely provided by trained rescuers and should continue with chest compressions, once the drowned person and the rescuer are on land or in a boat, the report authors wrote.

“The focused update on drowning contains the most up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations on how to resuscitate someone who has drowned,” McCallin states in a press release.

In addition to the new guidance on rescue breaths, the update includes new topics that the AHA has not previously addressed with treatment recommendations, such as oxygen administration after drowning; automated external defibrillator use in cardiac arrest after drowning and public-access defibrillation programs.

 

Pediatricians Can Help Spread the Word

Alexandra Stern, MD, assistant professor in the Department of Pediatrics at University of Florida, Gainesville, who was not part of the update, said pediatricians can help disseminate this new information.

“Water safety is a topic frequently discussed as a pediatrician, with focus often being on primary prevention of drowning,” she said. “We stress the importance of the multiple layers of protection against drowning, such as touch supervision (staying within arm’s length); secure fencing, access to appropriate life jackets, and teaching our children to swim. Learning CPR is a large part of these measures and continuing these discussions with our patients and families is important.”

She added that updating the recommended procedures will likely require changes to all forms of education and community outreach regarding drowning from basic life support classes to more advanced lifeguard training. She noted that the update provides practical guidance not just for trained rescuers and healthcare professionals, but also for family members. 

The paper notes that drowning is the third leading cause of death from unintentional injury globally, accounting for 7% of all injury-related deaths. In the United States, drowning is the leading cause of death in children aged 1-4 years and the second leading cause of death from unintentional injury in children aged 5-14 years.

The update is based on systematic reviews from 2021 to 2023 performed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation related to the resuscitation of drowning.

The authors and Stern reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

New recommendations on rescuing adults and children who have drowned include an important update for healthcare professionals, trained rescuers, and untrained lay rescuers. 

The American Heart Association (AHA) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) have issued recommendations that highlight delivering rescue breaths as well as calling 911 and performing chest compressions in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) as first steps when a person pulled from the water is in cardiac arrest.

This is the first collaboration between the two organizations on resuscitation after drowning. The recommendations were published simultaneously in Circulation and Pediatrics.

Included in the recommendations are two key principles:

• Anyone pulled from the water who has no signs of normal breathing or consciousness should be presumed to be in cardiac arrest.
• Rescuers should immediately start CPR that includes rescue breathing in addition to chest compressions. Multiple large studies show more people with cardiac arrest from noncardiac causes such as drowning survive when CPR includes rescue breaths, compared with hands-only CPR (calling 911 and pushing hard and fast in the center of the chest).

If someone is untrained, unwilling, or unable to give breaths, they can perform chest compressions until help arrives, the recommendations advise.

 

Reasoning Behind the Update

The authors, led by writing group cochair Tracy E. McCallin, MD, associate professor in the division of pediatric emergency medicine at Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital in Cleveland , Ohio, explained that drowning generally advances from initial respiratory arrest from submersion-related hypoxia to cardiac arrest, and therefore it can be difficult to distinguish respiratory arrest from cardiac arrest because pulses are difficult to accurately palpate within the recommended 10-second window.

“Therefore, resuscitation from cardiac arrest due to this specific circumstance must focus on restoring breathing as much as it does circulation,” the authors wrote.

Resuscitation after drowning may begin in the water with rescue breathing when safely provided by trained rescuers and should continue with chest compressions, once the drowned person and the rescuer are on land or in a boat, the report authors wrote.

“The focused update on drowning contains the most up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations on how to resuscitate someone who has drowned,” McCallin states in a press release.

In addition to the new guidance on rescue breaths, the update includes new topics that the AHA has not previously addressed with treatment recommendations, such as oxygen administration after drowning; automated external defibrillator use in cardiac arrest after drowning and public-access defibrillation programs.

 

Pediatricians Can Help Spread the Word

Alexandra Stern, MD, assistant professor in the Department of Pediatrics at University of Florida, Gainesville, who was not part of the update, said pediatricians can help disseminate this new information.

“Water safety is a topic frequently discussed as a pediatrician, with focus often being on primary prevention of drowning,” she said. “We stress the importance of the multiple layers of protection against drowning, such as touch supervision (staying within arm’s length); secure fencing, access to appropriate life jackets, and teaching our children to swim. Learning CPR is a large part of these measures and continuing these discussions with our patients and families is important.”

She added that updating the recommended procedures will likely require changes to all forms of education and community outreach regarding drowning from basic life support classes to more advanced lifeguard training. She noted that the update provides practical guidance not just for trained rescuers and healthcare professionals, but also for family members. 

The paper notes that drowning is the third leading cause of death from unintentional injury globally, accounting for 7% of all injury-related deaths. In the United States, drowning is the leading cause of death in children aged 1-4 years and the second leading cause of death from unintentional injury in children aged 5-14 years.

The update is based on systematic reviews from 2021 to 2023 performed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation related to the resuscitation of drowning.

The authors and Stern reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.