OP-34: Clinical validation survey for blood loss quantification in forensic practice

Détails

ID Serval
serval:BIB_C712721D304B
Type
Actes de conférence (partie): contribution originale à la littérature scientifique, publiée à l'occasion de conférences scientifiques, dans un ouvrage de compte-rendu (proceedings), ou dans l'édition spéciale d'un journal reconnu (conference proceedings).
Sous-type
Abstract (résumé de présentation): article court qui reprend les éléments essentiels présentés à l'occasion d'une conférence scientifique dans un poster ou lors d'une intervention orale.
Collection
Publications
Titre
OP-34: Clinical validation survey for blood loss quantification in forensic practice
Titre de la conférence
IALM intersocietal symposium
Auteur(s)
Lardi C., Murith N., Perneger T., Mangin P., Fracasso T.
Adresse
Venise, Italie, 21-24 juin 2016
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
2016
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Langue
anglais
Résumé
Background and Aims. Blood loss evaluation in forensic medicine is of major relevance for survival time estimation and assessment of the degree of a life-threatening condition. Several algorithms for perioperative blood loss quantification have been proposed in the literature. Specific algorithm,.based on sex, height, weight, distant hemoglobin levels and transfusions, was selected. The aim of this study was to evaluate the power of this algorithm for forensic purposes.
Materials and Methods. A clinical prospective study was conducted on 30 consecutive patients during open abdominal aortic surgery. Hemoglobin level was registered at different time points: before, during and after. procedure. lntraoperative blood loss was measured by the surgeon and any transfusion (red blood cells and intraoperative autologous blood transfusion) was recorded. Estimated blood loss was calculated according to the algorithm and results were compared to measured intraoperative blood loss.
Results. Mean measured hemorrhage was 1008 ml per patient (min 120, max 2280, SD 714). Significant positive correlation was observed between measured and calculated results I (r=0.647, r=0.701, r=0.768; p<0.01). The algorithm globally overestimated the losses, showing significant difference between the results.
Conclusions. Measured hemorrhage was probably underestimated considering hidden blood loss. Nevertheless, caution is mandatory for application of this algorithm in forensic practice.
Mots-clé
Blood loss, quantification, algorithm, hemorrhage
Création de la notice
13/07/2016 12:56
Dernière modification de la notice
03/03/2018 21:18
Données d'usage