Retrospective value assessment of a dedicated, trauma hybrid operating room

Background: In traumatic hemorrhage, hybrid operating rooms offer near simultaneous performance of endovascular and open techniques, with correlations to earlier hemorrhage control, fewer transfusions, and possible decreased mortality. However, hybrid operating rooms are resource intensive. This study quantifies and describes a single-center experience with the complications, cost-utility, and value of a dedicated trauma hybrid operating room.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study evaluated 292 consecutive adult trauma patients who underwent immediate (<4 hours) operative intervention at a Level I trauma center. A total of 106 patients treated before the construction of a hybrid operating room served as historical controls to the 186 patients treated thereafter. Demographics, hemorrhage-control procedures, and financial data as well as postoperative complications and outcomes were collected via electronic medical records. Value and incremental cost-utility ratio were calculated.

Results: Demographics and severity of illness were similar between cohorts. Resuscitative endovascular occlusion of the aorta was more frequently used in the hybrid operating room. Hemorrhage control occurred faster (60 vs. 49 minutes, p = 0.005) and, in the 4- to 24-hour postadmission period, required less red blood cell (mean, 1.0 vs. 0 U, p = 0.001) and plasma (mean, 1.0 vs. 0 U, p < 0.001) transfusions. Complications were similar except for a significant decrease in pneumonia (7% vs. 4%, p = 0.008). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo classification, ≥3) were similar. Across the patient admission, costs were not significantly different ($50,023 vs. $54,740, p = 0.637). There was no change in overall value (1.00 vs. 1.07, p = 0.778).

Conclusion: The conversion of our standard trauma operating room to an endovascular hybrid operating room provided measurable improvements in hemorrhage control, red blood cell and plasma transfusions, and postoperative pneumonia without significant increase in cost. Value was unchanged.

Level of evidence: Economic/Value-Based Evaluations; Level III.