Erratum
Following publication of the original article [1], it was brought to our attention that there were a few errors in Table 2:
Table 2.
REBOA (n = 636) | ACC (n = 267) | P value | |
---|---|---|---|
Disposition at discharge | <0.001* | ||
Died (in-hospital mortality) | 405/607 (67%) | 210/233 (90%) | |
Transferred | 118/607 (19%) | 11/233 (4.7%) | |
Home | 83/607 (14%) | 12/233 (5.2%) | |
Other | 1/607 (0.1%) | 0/233 (0.0%) | |
Disposition at ED | <0.001* | ||
Died (ED mortality) | 137/625 (22%) | 130/264 (49%) | |
ICU admission | 472/625 (76%) | 129/264 (49%) | |
Ward admission | 137/625 (22%) | 4/264 (1.5%) | |
Other | 5/625 (1.8%) | 1/264 (0.4%) |
The variables are shown as n (%)
ACC aortic cross clamping, ED emergency department, ICU intensive care unit, REBOA resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta
*Chi-square test
CU admission should read: ICU admission
11/233 (1.8%) should read: 11/233 (4.7%)
12/233 (2.0%) should read: 12/233 (5.2%)
The corrected table is presented in this erratum [Table 2].
Furthermore, the sentence “…only 14% (83/607) of REBOA patients and 2.0% (12/233) of ACC patients could leave the hospital and go home.” in the Discussion section should as a consequence read: “…only 14% (83/607) of REBOA patients and 5.2% (12/233) of ACC patients could leave the hospital and go home.”
This has now been corrected in this erratum.
Footnotes
The online version of the original article can be found under doi:10.1186/s13054-016-1577-x.
Reference
- 1.Abe T, Uchida M, Nagata I, Saitoh D, Tamiya N. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta versus aortic cross clamping among patients with critical trauma: a nationwide cohort study in Japan. Crit Care. 2015;20:400. doi: 10.1186/s13054-016-1577-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]