@article{ref1,
title="Kabul airport suicide bombing attack: mass casualty management at the Emergency'NGO hospital",
journal="Journal of trauma and acute care surgery",
year="2022",
author="Ornella, Spagnolello and Esmati, Shekiba and Amiri, Abdul Fahim and Shahir, Mir Abdul Azim and Gatti, Sofia and Portella, Gina and Langer, Martin",
volume="ePub",
number="ePub",
pages="ePub-ePub",
abstract="BACKGROUND: Terrorist attacks with large numbers of civilian victims are not uncommon in war-torn countries, and present a unique challenge for health care facilities with limited resources. However, these events are largely under-reported and little is known about how the mass casualty events (MCE) are handled outside of a military setting. <br><br>METHODS: This study is a retrospective analysis of the MCE which ensued the Kabul Airport suicide attack (26th August 2021) at the Kabul EMERGENCY'NGO Hospital (Afghanistan). <br><br>RESULTS: Within six hours 93 causalities presented at our hospital. Out of them, 36 severe injured were admitted. Mean age was 30.8 years (SD 10.1). The most common injury mechanism was shell fragments. The most common injury site was head (63%; 23/36), followed by limbs (55.5%; 20/36) and thoracoabdominal region (30.5%; 11/36). Combined injuries occurred in 38.9% of cases. Patients receiving surgery presented more combined injuries in comparison with patients receiving only medical treatment (47.1% vs 31.6%). Thoraco-abdomen (25.0% vs 15.4%) and/or extremity injury (42.9% vs 28.6%) were more prevalent in the surgical group. Thirty major surgical procedures were carried out on 17 patients in the nine hours following the first arrival. The rate of Intensive Care Unit/High Dependency Unit admission was 36.1% and the 30-day in-hospital mortality was 16.6% (6/36). All deaths were recorded in the first 24 hours and none of them received surgery. <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: A large number of wounded patients must be anticipated after suicide bombing attacks. The authors report the challenges faced and key aspects of their management of MCEs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective analysis/incident management.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="2163-0755",
doi="10.1097/TA.0000000000003724",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000003724"
}