Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 949 - файл

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
29.08.2026
Размер:
7 Мб
Скачать
24
B. T. Stewart
25. Allen CE, Figueroa J, Agarwal M, Little WK. Pediatric scald injuries sustained from instant soup and noodle products. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2021;60:16–9.
26. Bentivegna K, McCollum S, Wu R, Hunter AA. A state-wide analysis of pediatric scald burns by tap water, 2016-2018. Burns. 2020;46:1805–12.
2 7. Baggott K, Rabbitts A, Leahy NE, Bourke P, Yurt RW.Pediatric
sink-bathing: a risk for scald burns. J Burn Care Res. 2013;34:639–43.
28. Palmieri TL, Alderson TS, Ison D, etal. Pediatric soup scald burn injury: etiology and prevention. J Burn Care Res. 2008;29:114–8.
29. Tyler MD, Richards DB, Reske-Nielsen C, etal. The epidemiology of drowning in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2017;17:413.
30. Ablewhite J, McDaid L, Hawkins A, etal. Approaches used by parents to keep their children safe at home: a qualitative study to explore the perspectives of parents with children aged under five years. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:983.
31. Mashreky SR, Rahman A, Svanstrom L, Linnan MJ, Shafinaz S, Rahman F. Experience from community based childhood burn prevention programme in Bangladesh: implication for low resource setting. Burns. 2011;37:770–5.
32. Peck M, Molnar J, Swart D.A global plan for burn prevention and care. Bull World Health Organ. 2009;87:802–3.
33. Shields BJ, Comstock RD, Fernandez SA, Xiang H, Smith GA. Healthcare resource utilization and epidemiology of pediatric burn-associated hospitalizations, United States, 2000. J Burn Care Res. 2010;31:506–7.
34. Potokar T, Bendell R, Chamania S, Falder S, Nnabuko R, Price PE. A comprehensive, integrated approach to quality improvement and capacity building in burn care and prevention in low and middle-income countries: an overview. Burns. 2020;46:1756–67.
35. Hyder AA, Sugerman DE, Puvanachandra P, et al. Global childhood unintentional injury surveillance in four cities in developing countries: a pilot study. Bull World Health Organ. 2009;87:345–52.
36. Pham TN, Kramer CB, Wang J, etal. Epidemiology and outcomes of older adults with burn injury: an analysis of the National Burn Repository. J Burn Care Res. 2009;30:30–6.
Chapter 1. Epidemiology
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
25
3 7. Marshall SW, Runyan CW, Bangdiwala SI, Linzer MA, Sacks
JJ, Butts JD.Fatal residential fires: who dies and who survives? JAMA. 1998;279:1633–7.
38. Romanowski K, Curtis E, Barsun A, Palmieri T, Greenhalgh D, Sen S.The frailty tipping point: Determining which patients are targets for intervention in a burn population. Burns. 2019;45:1051–6.
39. Maxwell D, Rhee P, Drake M, Hodge J, Ingram W, Williams R. Development of the Burn Frailty Index: a prognostication index for elderly patients sustaining burn injuries. Am J Surg. 2019;218:87–94.
40. Romanowski KS, Barsun A, Pamlieri TL, Greenhalgh DG, Sen S.Frailty score on admission predicts outcomes in elderly burn injury. J Burn Care Res. 2015;36:1–6.
41. Pham TN, Carrougher GJ, Martinez E, et al. Predictors of discharge disposition in older adults with burns: a study of the burn model systems. J Burn Care Res. 2015;36:607–12.
42. McGwin G Jr, Chapman V, Rousculp M, Robison J, Fine P.The epidemiology of fire-related deaths in Alabama, 1992-1997. J Burn Care Rehabil. 2000;21:75–3; discussion 4.
43. Peck MD.Epidemiology of burns throughout the World. Part II: intentional burns in adults. Burns. 2012;38:630–7.
44. Fagenholz PJ, Sheridan RL, Harris NS, Pelletier AJ, Camargo CA Jr. National study of Emergency Department visits for burn injuries, 1993 to 2004. J Burn Care Res. 2007;28:681–90.
45. Sengoelge M, El-Khatib Z, Laflamme L. The global burden of child burn injuries in light of country level economic development and income inequality. Prev Med Rep. 2017;6:115–20.
46. Gupta S, Mahmood U, Gurung S, et al. Burns in Nepal: a population based national assessment. Burns. 2015;41:1126–32.
4 7. Peden M, Oyegbite K, Ozanne-Smith J, et al. World report on
child injury prevention. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2008.
48. Mehta K, Thrikutam N, Nakarmi KK, Hoyte-Williams PE, Peck M, Stewart BT. Epidemiology and outcomes of cooking and cookstove-related burn injuries: a World Health Organization (WHO) Global Burn Registry (GBR) report. J Burn Care Res. 2021;42:51–2.
49. Rosenthal J, Quinn A, Grieshop AP, Pillarisetti A, Glass RI.Clean cooking and the SDGs: Integrated analytical approaches to guide energy interventions for health and environment goals. Energy Sustain Dev. 2018;42:152–9.
26
B. T. Stewart
50. Gallagher M, Beard M, Clifford MJ, Craig M, Watson. An evaluation of a biomass stove safety protocol used for testing household cookstoves, in low and middle-income countries. Energy Sustain Dev. 2016;33:14–25.
51. Carrougher GJ, Bamer AM, Mandell SP, etal. Factors affecting employment after burn injury in the united states: a burn model system national database investigation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020;101:S71–85.
52. Carrougher GJ, Brych SB, Pham TN, Mandell SP, Gibran NS.An intervention bundle to facilitate return to work for burn-injured workers: report from a burn model system investigation. J Burn Care Res. 2017;38:e70–e8.
53. Gupta S, Groen TA, Stewart BT, etal. The spatial distribution of injuries in need of surgical intervention in Nepal. Geospat Health. 2016;11:359.
54. Sandvall BK, Jacobson L, Miller EA, etal. Fireworks type, injury pattern, and permanent impairment following severe fireworks­related injuries. Am J Emerg Med. 2017;35:1469–73.
55. Boschini LP, Tyson AF, Samuel JC, et al. The role of seizure disorders in burn injury and outcome in Sub-Saharan Africa. J Burn Care Res. 2014;35:e406–12.
56. Al-Qattan MM, Al-Zahrani K. A review of burns related to traditions, social habits, religious activities, festivals and traditional medical practices. Burns. 2009;35:476–81.
5 7. Livingston G, Huntley J, Sommerlad A, et al. Dementia
prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission. Lancet. 2020;396:413–46.
58. Forjuoh SN. The mechanisms, intensity of treatment, and outcomes of hospitalized burns: issues for prevention. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1998;19:456–60.
59. Tung KY, Chen ML, Wang HJ, etal. A seven-year epidemiology study of 12,381 admitted burn patients in Taiwan—using the Internet registration system of the Childhood Burn Foundation. Burns. 2005;31(Suppl 1):S12–7.
60. Mannan A, Ghani S, Clarke A, Butler PE. Cases of chemical assault worldwide: a literature review. Burns. 2007;33:149–54.
61. Ahmed F, Maroof H, Ahmed N, Sheridan R.Acid attacks: a new public health pandemic in the west? Int J Surg. 2017;48:32–3.
62. Bagcchi S.Private hospitals are told to treat acid attack victims free of charge. BMJ. 2015;350:h2224.
63. Kay M. Indian court restricts the sale of acid to try to curb attacks on women. BMJ. 2013;347:f4762.
Chapter 1. Epidemiology
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
27
64. Sugrue R, Reilly F, Kelly J, Clover J.The discordant relationship between acid attack incidence and advances in management. Burns. 2018;44:236–7.
65. Justice? What Justice?: tackling acid violence and ensuring justice for survivors. J.Sagar Associates, India: Acid Survivors Trust International and TrustLaw; 2017.
66. Alishahi Tabriz A, Dabbagh H, Koenig HG. Medical ethics in qisas (eye-for-an-eye) punishment: an islamic view; an examination of acid throwing. J Relig Health. 2016;55:1426–32.
6 7. Bagcchi S.Acid attack victims should have same rights as disabled
people, Indian Supreme Court rules. BMJ. 2015;351:h6787.
68. Kazerooni Y, Mishra B, Gibran N, et al. A systematic review and comprehensive legislative framework to address chemical assault globally. Health Policy Plan. 2020;35:1188–207.
69. Nagarajan M, Mohamed S, Asmar O, Stubbington Y, George S, Shokrollahi K.Data from national media reports of ‘Acid attacks’ in England: a new piece in the Jigsaw. Burns. 2020;46:949–58.
70. Stewart BT, Lafta R, Esa Al Shatari SA, Cherewick M, Burnham G, Hagopian A, Galway LP, Kushner AL. Burns in Baghdad from 2003 to 2014: Results of a randomized household cluster survey. Burns. 2016;42(1):48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
burns.2015.10.002. Epub 2015 Oct 31.
71. Stewart BT, Trelles M, Dominguez L, etal. Surgical burn care by Medecins Sans Frontieres-Operations Center Brussels: 2008 to
2014. J Burn Care Res. 2016;37:e519–e24.
72. Peck M, Falk H, Meddings D, Sugerman D, Mehta S, Sage M.The design and evaluation of a system for improved surveillance and prevention programmes in resource-limited settings using a hospital-based burn injury questionnaire. Inj Prev. 2016;22(Suppl
1):i56–62.
73. Mashreky SR, Rahman A, Chowdhury SM, etal. Consequences of childhood burn: findings from the largest community-based injury survey in Bangladesh. Burns. 2008;34:912–8.
74. Dave DR, Nagarjan N, Canner JK, Kushner AL, Stewart BT, Group SR.Rethinking burns for low & middle-income countries: differing patterns of burn epidemiology, care seeking behavior, and outcomes across four countries. Burns. 2018;44:1228–34.
75. Runyan CW. Using the Haddon matrix: introducing the third dimension. Inj Prev. 1998;4:302–7.
Chapter 2
Pathophysiology andHypermetabolic Response toBurn
RoohiVinaik, DaliaBarayan, andMarcG.Jeschke
Introduction
Burn injuries represent one of the most severe forms of trauma affecting more than two million people in North America each year [1]. According to the World Health Organization, there are an estimated 300,000 deaths per year worldwide related to thermal injury [2]. In Canada, there are approximately 43,000 emergency visits and over 2000 hospitalization per annum due to burn injuries [3].
R. Vinaik · D. Barayan Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Canada e-mail: roohi.vinaik@mail.utoronto.ca;
dalia.barayan@sri.utoronto.ca
M. G. Jeschke (*) Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON, Canada
McMaster University Hamilton, ON, Canada e-mail: marc.jeschke@hhsc.ca
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 J. O. Lee (ed.), Essential Burn Care for Non-Burn Specialists,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28898-2_2
29
30
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
R. Vinaik et al.
Outcomes have improved over the years due to establish­ment of specialized burn centers and improvements in resus­citation, dedicated burn-specific protocols, improved wound coverage and infection control, and improved management of inhalation injury [4]. However, burn patients still experi­ence unacceptably high rates of morbidity and mortality despite improved clinical care.
Poor outcomes in severe burns, or burns encompassing more that 20% of the total body surface area (TBSA), are attributable in part to the debilitating hypermetabolic stress response, which is unrivaled in terms of its magnitude and persistence [5]. Post-burn hypermetabolism is associated with negative sequelae, including sepsis and multi-organ failure— leading causes of death in burn patients [4]. Essentially, meta­bolic dysfunction in burns is characterized by two distinct phases, an initial “ebb phase” during which metabolism and tissue perfusion are decreased, and a following “flow phase” defined by elevated resting energy expenditure (REE) >110% of predicted REE [6]. The flow phase is accompanied by pronounced muscle catabolism and lipolysis, loss of total and lean body mass, and stress-induced diabetes, which even­tually lead to physiologic exhaustion. However, although the phenomenon of hypermetabolism has been well documented, the mechanisms underlying this response are still not com­pletely elucidated. An improved understanding of post-burn hypermetabolism, accompanying changes, and management are necessary to optimize patient care.
In this chapter, we define the hypermetabolic response after burns, highlighting the key metabolic consequences. In particular, we focus on glucose, lipid, and protein metabolism. Then, we discuss the various organ systems affected by post­burn hypermetabolism including the cardiac, renal, gastroin­testinal, and immune systems. We conclude with a discussion of management of hypermetabolism in the clinical setting, namely focusing on how to calculate energy expenditure, conservative measures such as nutritional supplementation and early mobilization, and pertinent pharmacological intervention.
Chapter 2. Pathophysiology andHypermetabolic…
31
What Is Hypermetabolism?
Several reports demonstrated that post-burn metabolic changes occur in a biphasic fashion. Two distinct patterns of metabolic regulation can be observed following injury [7]. The first phase is early shock hypometabolism (ebb phase), which usually occurs within 48h post-burn. This response is characterized by decreased cardiac output, oxygen con­sumption, and metabolic rate as well as impaired glucose tolerance associated with the hyperglycemic state [8]. Within the first five days post-injury, however, these meta­bolic variables gradually increase to a plateau phase. This second hypermetabolic phase (flow phase) is characterized by a hyperdynamic circulation and increased metabolic rate with resulting increases in body temperature, oxygen and glucose consumption, CO2 production, and futile substrate cycling [8]. Typically, patients are considered hypermeta­bolic when their REE is increased 10% or more above normal [5]. This hypermetabolic stress response is initiated to provide sufficient energy for maintaining organ function and whole-body homeostasis under demanding trauma conditions [4, 79].
While initially ubiquitous and essential, prolonged post­burn hypermetabolism has negative consequences that are a byproduct of pronounced metabolic derangements. For example, elevated circulating levels of catecholamines, gluca­gon, and cortisol after injury stimulate excess release of free fatty acids (FFAs) and glycerol from fat (450% increase in triglyceride-fatty acid cycling), eventually resulting in organ alterations associated with organ damage and dysfunction. Increased lipolysis is further accompanied by increased glu­cose production by the liver (250% increase in glycolytic­gluconeogenic cycling) and insulin release that is twice that of controls in response to glucose load, indicative of profound insulin resistance [1014]. Stress hormones induce proteolysis to increase availability of amino acids leading to cachexia (all summarized in Fig. 2.1). The extent and duration of this altered metabolic demand (discussed below) are directly
32
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
R. Vinaik et al.
F . Schematic depicting key post-burn hypermetabolic alterations
related to the degree of burn injury quantified based on total body surface area (TBSA) with partial- and full-thickness burns [1517].
Magnitude andDuration
A recent comparison of genomic alterations in white blood cells (WBCs) following acute lipopolysaccharide (LPS) expo­sure, blunt trauma, and severe burns demonstrated that gene expression returns to normal within 24 h of LPS exposure [18] and one month after blunt trauma [19]. However, the WBC genome of burn patients uniquely remains altered for up to one-year post-injury—the furthest time point studied. The duration of the genomic response to burn trauma paral­lels that of the metabolic perturbations induced by the injury [1, 20, 21]. Within the first few months after burn, metabolic rate increases ~40–80% above normal and remains elevated for up to one-year post-injury [22]. Although both poly­trauma [23] and sepsis [24] also trigger a similar metabolic
Chapter 2. Pathophysiology andHypermetabolic…
response, the degree of this hypermetabolic state is less than that of burns and resolves more promptly. For patients with >40% TBSA full-thickness burns, resting metabolic rate at thermal neutral temperature (30°C) has been shown to sur­pass 140% of normal at admission and is reduced to 130% once wounds are fully healed, to 120% at 6 months, and then to 110% at 12 months post-injury [25]. While this hypermeta­bolic response decays significantly in the first 6 months after burn, more recent studies have revealed that severely burned patients can remain hypermetabolic for up to 3years post­injury [22, 26, 27].
The magnitude and persistence of this stress response depend not only on burn size, age, and body composition but also the patient’s preprogrammed genetic response to an insult. Inhalation injury or another insult such as an infection can further accentuate and prolong the increased metabolic rate after injury [15]. Unfortunately, persistent hypermetabo­lism after burn trauma is a major concern as it is associated with a profound catabolic state in almost every organ system of the body [22, 28] (Fig.2.1). To date the cellular and molecu­lar mechanisms underlying burn-induced hypermetabolism have not been fully identified and despite improved clinical care, the detrimental sequelae of this complex response are major contributor to post-burn morbidity and mortality.
33
Biomarkers andMediators
As discussed above, marked and sustained increases in cate­cholamine, glucocorticoid, glucagon, and dopamine secretion are involved in initiating the acute hypermetabolic response and its ensuing catabolic state after injury [1, 2937] The rise in these catabolic hormones is accompanied by a decrease in the normal endogenous activity of anabolic agents, primarily human growth hormone and testosterone, which together combine to result in a large net protein loss [38, 39]. Cytokines such as interleukin 6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF), endotoxin, neutrophil-adherence complexes, reactive oxygen
34
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
R. Vinaik et al.
species, nitric oxide, and coagulation as well as comple­ment cascades have also been implicated in mediating and maintaining the post-burn hypermetabolic state [28]. Once these cascades of events are initiated, their mediators and by­products further drive the persistent and increased metabolic rate accompanied by alterations in glucose, lipid, and amino acid metabolism [40]. This self-perpetuating process is specu­lated to drive an entire spectrum of metabolic abnormalities that are observed after severe burn injury. Thus, management of burn-induced hypermetabolism remains a clinical priority. If left untreated, this protective stress response becomes auto destructive, ultimately causing vast cachexia, multi-organ fail­ure, and even death [111, 13, 14]. In the ensuing section, we will discuss some of the key metabolic sequelae after burns in detail, along with the specific organ systems targeted in thermal injuries.
Metabolic Consequences: Glucose, Lipids, Amino Acids
Glucose Metabolism
Glucose homeostasis in healthy subjects is tightly regulated. Under normal circumstances, post-prandial elevations in cir­culating glucose levels stimulate pancreatic β-cells to release insulin—a potent anabolic hormone. Insulin release pro­motes peripheral glucose uptake into skeletal muscle and adipose tissue and suppresses glucose production (i.e., gluco­neogenesis) in the liver, thereby restoring blood glucose con­centrations [41, 42]. However, post-burn metabolic alterations cause significant shifts in energy substrate metabolism in order to provide glucose—a major fuel source to vital organs. In order to satisfy the high energy demands of the post-burn hypermetabolic state, glucose levels are markedly increased by (1) releasing the above-mentioned stress mediators, pri­marily glucagon and cortisol, to oppose the anabolic actions of insulin, (2) activating hepatic gluconeogenesis to increase