Evidence Hub

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta in surgical and trauma patients: a systematic review, meta-analysis and practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

Melike N. Harfouche, Nikolay Bugaev, John J. Como, D. Fraser, A. McNickle, G. Golani, Benjamin P. Johnson, H. Hojman et al.

Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open, 2025

18 citations

Abstract

Background The role of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) in the management of patients with subdiaphragmatic bleeding, as well as its utility in traumatic cardiac arrest (TCA), is unknown. Methods A working group from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology (GRADE) to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis, assess the level of evidence, and create recommendations pertaining to the use of REBOA in the management of trauma or non-trauma patients, as well as those in TCA (1946 to 2024). Results Thirty-one studies were included in the meta-analysis. In unstable trauma patients with subdiaphragmatic bleeding, there was no significant difference in mortality among patients who were treated with REBOA vs no REBOA [OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.37, 2.04]. Subgroup analysis for individuals with pelvic fractures demonstrated higher mortality for REBOA vs no REBOA [OR=2.15, CI 1.35, 3.42]. In patients with TCA, pooled analysis demonstrated decreased mortality with REBOA vs resuscitative thoracotomy (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.15, 0.69). Compared with no REBOA, prophylactic placement of REBOA prior to cesarean section in placenta accreta syndrome (PAS) had lower intra-operative blood loss [−1.06 L, CI −1.57 to –0.56] and red blood cell transfusion [−2.44 units, CI −4.27 to –0.62]. Overall, the level of evidence was assessed by the working group as very low.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free