Table 1 Characteristics of the five included studies which evaluated the efficacy of a hybrid operating theatre for severe trauma

Gross, 2009

Switzerland

Prospective cohort that underwent either hybrid or conventional treatment based on availability of the MIGTS

MIGTS (hybrid OT incorporating CT scanner)

87

81

Mean 42 years old, Consecutive multiply injured trauma patients (ISS > / = 16)

Diagnostic CT scan, angiographic procedures and/or surgery

24 months

Loftus, 2020

USA

Retrospective cohort comparing before (conventional group) & after (hybrid OT) implementation of a hybrid OT

Remodeled angiography suite within an OT

186

106

Median 41 years old, Consecutive adult trauma patients who underwent immediate surgery (within 4 h of arrival at a trauma center)

Angiographic procedures and/or surgery

In-hospital stay

Carver, 2020

Canada

Prospective cohort (hybrid OT group) compared with a consecutive retrospective cohort (conventional group)

RAPTOR suite

169

169

Mean 38 years old, Adult trauma patients severely injured (ISS > / = 12) and required an intervention

Angiographic procedures and/or surgery

In-hospital stay

Kataoka, 2016

Japan

Retrospective cohort that underwent either hybrid or conventional treatment within the same period

Remodeled angiography suite within an OT

13

45

Age > / = 16 years old, Severely injured patients (ISS > 15) who underwent both emergency surgery and IR

Angiographic procedures and surgery

In-hospital stay

Jang, 2020

Korea

Retrospective cohort that underwent either hybrid or conventional treatment within the same period

Remodeled angiography suite within an OT

26

69

Median 54 years old, Trauma patients (ISS > / = 9) who underwent emergency surgery and/or IR within 2 h on admission

Hybrid group: Angiographic procedures OR combined angiographic procedures and surgery

Non hybrid group: surgery

In-hospital stay