Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) Use in Animal Trauma Models

ABSTRACT

Background

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) was developed to prevent traumatic exsanguination. We aim to identify the outcomes in animal models with 1) partial versus complete REBOA occlusion and 2) zone 1 versus 2 placements.

Methods

The PRISMA guidelines were followed. We conducted a search of PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar for REBOA studies in animal trauma models using the following search terms: "REBOA trauma", "REBOA outcomes" "REBOA complications". SYRCLE's RoB Tool was utilized for the risk of bias and study quality assessment.

Results

Our search yielded 14 RCTs for inclusion. Eleven studies directly investigated partial REBOA versus total aortic occlusion. Overall, partial REBOA techniques were associated with similar attainment of proximal MAP but with significantly less ischemic burden. Significant mortality benefit with partial occlusion was observed in three studies. Survival time post-occlusion also was improved with zone 3 placement versus zone 1 (100% versus 33%; P < 0.01).

Conclusions

There appears to be a fine balance between desired proximal arterial pressure and time of occlusion for overall survival and subsequent risk of distal ischemia. Many "partial occlusion" techniques may be superior in attaining such balance over prolonged REBOA inflation where no distal flow is allowed. Tailored zone 3 placement may offer significant mortality and morbidity advantages compared to sustained total occlusion and indiscriminate zone 1 placement strategies. As clear conclusions regarding REBOA are unlikely to be established in animal models, larger randomized investigations utilizing human subjects are needed to describe optimal REBOA technique and applicability in greater detail.