Diagnostic laparoscopy and diverting sigmoid loop colostomy in the management of civilian extraperitoneal rectal gunshot injuries

BACKGROUND: This prospective study reviews the management of isolated civilian extraperitoneal rectal gunshot injuries using a protocol of diagnostic laparoscopy and abdominal wall trephine diverting loop colostomy, without laparotomy, distal rectal washout and presacral drainage. METHODS: Patients admitted to the trauma unit at Groote Schuur Hospital between January 2000 and December 2002 with a rectal injury were evaluated. A rectal injury was confirmed by digital rectal examination and proctosigmoidoscopy. Missile peritoneal violation was excluded by diagnostic laparoscopy. Normal laparoscopy was followed by creation of a diverting sigmoid loop colostomy through an abdominal wall trephine, without a laparotomy. No distal rectal washout or presacral drainage was performed. RESULTS: Of the 104 patients admitted with 106 rectal injuries, 20 (19.2 per cent) qualified for inclusion in the study. All had sustained low-velocity gunshot injuries of which 18 exhibited a transpelvic trajectory. Diagnostic laparoscopy was normal and a trephine diverting loop sigmoid colostomy was performed in all 20 patients. No pelvic sepsis occurred. Two patients developed rectocutaneous fistulas, both of which resolved without surgical treatment. Nineteen stomas have since been closed. CONCLUSION: Low-velocity gunshot injuries isolated to the extraperitoneal rectum can be managed safely by laparoscopic exclusion of intraperitoneal missile penetration and diverting sigmoid loop colostomy, without laparotomy, distal rectal washout or presacral drainage     

Civilian Extraperitoneal Rectal Gunshot Wounds: Surgical Management Made Simpler

Background Rectal injuries are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Controversy persists regarding routine presacral drainage, distal rectal washout (DRW), and primary repair of extraperitoneal rectal injuries. This retrospective review was performed to determine the outcome of rectal injuries in an urban trauma center with a high incidence of penetrating trauma where a non-aggressive surgical approach to these injuries is practiced. Methods The records of all patients with a full-thickness penetrating rectal injury admitted to the Trauma Center at Groote Schuur Hospital over a 4-year period were reviewed. These were reviewed for demographics, injury mechanism and perioperative management, anatomical site of the rectal injury, associated intra-abdominal injuries and their management. Infectious complications and mortality were noted. Intraperitoneal rectal injuries were primarily repaired, with or without fecal diversion. Extraperitoneal rectal injuries were generally left untouched and a diverting colostomy was done. Presacral drainage and DRW were not routinely performed. Results Ninety-two patients with 118 rectal injuries [intraperitoneal (7), extraperitoneal (59), combined (26)] were identified. Only two extraperitoneal rectal injuries were repaired. None had presacral drainage. Eighty-six sigmoid loop colostomies were done. Two (2.2%) fistula, one rectocutaneous, and one rectovesical, were recorded. There were nine (9.9%) infectious complications: surgical site infection (4), buttock abscess (1), buttock necrosis (1), pubic ramus osteitis (1), septic arthritis (2). No perirectal sepsis occurred. Conclusions Extraperitoneal rectal injuries due to low-velocity trauma can be safely managed by fecal diversion alone.     

Is fecal diversion necessary for nondestructive penetrating extraperitoneal rectal injuries?

BACKGROUND: Current management of penetrating extraperitoneal rectal injury includes diversion of the fecal stream. The purpose of this study is to assess whether nondestructive penetrating extraperitoneal rectal injuries can be managed successfully without diversion of the fecal stream. METHODS: This study was performed at an urban Level I trauma center during a 28-month period from February 2003 through June 2005. All patients who suffered nondestructive penetrating extraperitoneal rectal injuries were managed with a diagnosis and treatment protocol that excluded fecal stream diversion. Patients were placed in one of two management arms based upon clinical suspicion for intraperitoneal injury. In the first arm, patients with suspicion for rectal injury and a positive clinical examination for intraperitoneal injuries were delivered to the operating room for exploratory laparotomy. Proctoscopy was performed before exploratory laparotomy. Extraperitoneal rectal injuries were left to heal by secondary intention. Intraperitoneal rectal injuries were repaired primarily. Patients did not receive fecal diversion or perineal drainage. In the second management arm, patients with a negative clinical examination for intraperitoneal injury and wounding agent trajectory suspicious for rectal injury underwent diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL), cystography, and proctoscopy in the emergency room. Positive DPL or cystography warranted laparotomy as above. Patients with positive proctoscopy alone were admitted and placed on a clear liquid diet. Barium enema was performed 5 to 7 days postinjury for all rectal injuries with diets advanced accordingly.A matched historic control group of rectal injury patients who underwent fecal diversion was compared with the nondiversion protocol group. Patients from both groups were matched for penetrating abdominal trauma index (PATI), age and mechanism of injury. RESULTS: There were 14 consecutive patients diagnosed with penetrating rectal injury placed in the nondiversion management protocol. Of these, 9 (64%) patients in the nondiversion group required laparotomy. The average age in the diversion historical control group was 30.5 years and 29.3 years in the nondiversion group. The average PATI in the diversion group was 15.3 and 16.1 in the nondiversion protocol group. The average length of stay for the diversion and nondiversion groups was 9.8 days (range, 7-15) and 7.2 days (range, 4-10), respectively. There were no complications associated with rectal injuries in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Nondestructive penetrating rectal injuries can be managed successfully without fecal diversion. Randomized prospective study will be necessary to assess this management method.     

结直肠损伤的手术治疗：附125例报告

目的:探讨结直肠损伤的手术治疗和围手术期处理。 方法:回顾性分析19年间收治的125例结直肠损伤患者的临床资料。结果:结肠和腹膜内直肠破裂69例中，初期缝合或切除吻合56例（81.16 %），行造口术11例，“损伤控制外科”术式2例。腹膜外直肠破裂18例中，14例行乙状结肠近端造口并骶前引流，4例一期修补未造口;其余38例非全层损伤患者，均做简单修补。全组死亡8例（6.40 %），6例术中、1例术后死于失血性休克，1例术后5 d死于胸腔感染。术后并发症包括局部感染6例、粘连性肠梗阻1例，均治愈。 结论:多数结肠和腹膜内直肠损伤可一期手术，应配合围手术期正确使用抗生素尤其甲硝唑。腹膜外直肠伤应分期手术，为阻断远端污染，应行乙状结肠近端造口而不选择襻式造口。     

Operative Management of Civilian Rectal Gunshot Wounds: Simpler Is Better

Extraperitoneal rectal gunshot wounds have been managed with a variety of methods from simple diverting colostomy to combinations of rectal repair, proximal diversion, transperitoneal or presacral drainage, and distal bowel irrigation techniques. Treatment methodology is chosen based on anecdotal experience, and there is no clear evidence that any technique is superior to the others. The objective of this study was to compare 3 methods of managing civilian extraperitoneal gunshot wounds. Retrospective analysis of 30 consecutive patients with extraperitoneal rectal gunshot wounds was undertaken. Patients were treated with 1 of these 3 techniques: (1) simple diverting colostomy without rectal repair (group A, 12 patients); (2) diverting colostomy and rectal repair (group B, 12 patients); and (3) diverting colostomy and presacral drainage without repair (group C, 6 patients). Injury, hospital course, and outcome data were compared. The 3 groups were similar in age, injury severity, admission hemodynamics, preoperative and intraoperative time, blood loss, fecal contamination, and associated injuries. The overall incidence of complications was 27% (8/27): 25% (3/12) in group A, 33% (4/12) in group B, and 17% (1/6) in group C (p= NS). Complications directly associated with the rectal injury were found in 2 cases (7%): 1 group A patient developed a vesicorectal fistula and 1 group B patient developed a rectocutaneous fistula. For 10 patients with both rectal and bladder injuries, the complication rates for groups A, B, and C were 50%, 20%, and 0%, respectively (p= NS). No patient died. In conclusion, diverting colostomy without rectal repair or drainage appears to be safe for the management of most civilian retroperitoneal rectal gunshot wounds. Additional surgical maneuvers may be required for combined rectal and urinary trauma or other complex rectal injuries. Sound surgical principles, tailored to the individual case, should overrule any unproven dogmas.     

Colostomy and drainage for civilian rectal injuries: is that all?

One hundred consecutive patients with injuries to the extraperitoneal rectum were treated over a ten-year period at an urban trauma center. The mechanisms of injury included firearms in 82 patients, stab wounds in 3 patients, a variety of other penetrating injuries in 10 patients, and in 5 patients the injuries resulted from blunt trauma. Treatment of the rectal injury was determined by the bias of the operating surgeon, the condition of the patient, and the magnitude of the rectal injury. Proximal loop colostomies were performed in 44 patients, diverting colostomies in 51 patients, Hartmann's procedure in 4 patients, and an abdominoperineal resection in 1 patient. Extraperitoneal rectal perforations were closed in 21 patients and the rectum was irrigated free of feces in 46 patients. Transperineal, presacral drainage was used in 93 patients. Infectious complications potentially related to the management of the rectal wound occurred in 11 patients (11%) and included abdominal or pelvic abscesses (4 patients), wound infections (6 patients), rectocutaneous fistulas (3 patients), and missile tract infections (2 patients). Four patients (4%) died as a result of their injuries. Of the therapeutic options available, statistical analysis revealed that only the failure to drain the presacral space increased the likelihood of infectious complications (p = 0.03); however, as it could not be determined with certainty that the use of, or failure to use, any particular therapeutic option had an effect on the risk of death. It is concluded that colostomy and drainage are the foundations of the successful treatment of civilian injuries to the extraperitoneal rectum. The use of adjuncts such as diverting colostomies, repair of the rectal wound, and irrigation of the rectum has little effect on mortality and morbidity.     

Management options in penetrating rectal injuries.

A retrospective analysis of 54 patients (1976-1989) with penetrating rectal injuries was carried out to evaluate the options in management. The diagnosis was made on proctosigmoidoscopy in 39 patients and at laparotomy in 15. Three patients died within 24 hours from extensive associated trauma (Abdominal Trauma Index [ATI] 39.2). In the remaining 51 patients, rectal wound repair was performed in seven patients, four without proximal colostomy (mean ATI 16.5) and three with colostomy (mean ATI 24.8) without complications. Colostomy and presacral drainage with or without repair were employed in 43 patients. Twenty-one of these patients had rectal washout in addition. The other 22 patients did not have this procedure. The incidence of pelvic abscess in these two groups, who had comparable mean ATI, was identical (4.7% and 4.5%, respectively). One other patient with an extraperitoneal rectal injury had a colostomy alone without presacral drainage and subsequently developed pelvic abscess. The overall incidence of abscess was three of 51 patients or 5.8%. There were no late deaths from sepsis. It is concluded that colostomy (loop or end) and presacral drainage are the most important components of rectal injury management. Small and isolated rectal or rectosigmoid perforations may be repaired primarily without fecal diversion. The value of distal rectal irrigation remains to be proven, but it may be indicated in high-energy injuries of the rectum.     

严重骨盆骨折合并毗邻脏器损伤的救治

目的探讨严重骨盆骨折合并毗邻脏器损伤的急诊处理方法。方法对14年中收治的79例严重骨盆骨折合并毗邻脏器损伤患者的资料做回顾性分析。结果骨盆大出血行髂内动脉结扎术33例、栓塞术8例;膀胱造口和后期尿道重建35例、尿道会师术7例;腹膜外直肠伤做结肠造口并骶前引流13例、一期修补4例;腹膜内结直肠伤一期手术19例、结肠造口3例。死亡率9％(7／79),主要死于休克和合并伤。共发生并发症7例：直肠膀胱瘘4例、右髂总动脉血栓形成1例、胸伤后急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)1例、截瘫1例,除截瘫均治愈。结论迅速准确的诊断治疗是成功的关键。髂内动脉断血术配合骨盆外固定支架的使用、膀胱造口和乙状结肠近端造口,是危重患者急诊治疗时常采用的有效方法。     

Successful management of injuries to the extraperitoneal rectum

We reviewed the records of 32 patients having extraperitoneal rectal trauma in the six-year period ending December 31, 1981. There were 23 penetrating injuries and nine blunt injuries. All patients were resuscitated and examined digitally by sigmoidoscope. Complete diverting colostomy and washout evacuation of the defunctionalized rectal segment were performed routinely. Dilatation of the anal sphincter and lavage with two to three liters of dilute povidone-iodine solution permitted cleansing of the rectal segment of all particulate fecal material. Retrorectal suction drains were inserted in 30 patients; the two remaining patients required abdominoperineal resection and gauze packing of the pelvis for control of hemorrhage. The mortality rate due to rectal injury was 3 per cent. Complications occurred in 5 patients (16%).     

Management of severe pelvic fracture associated with injuries of adjacent viscera

everepelvicfractureassociatedwithinjuriesofadjacentviscerahasahighmortality .Thefirst”goldenhour”aftertraumashouldbegrasped ,sincethemanagementinthishourcandeterminegreatlywhetherthecritically injuredvictimcouldsurvive .Inthispaper ,theexperienceintheemergencymanagementofsuch patientsisreviewedinordertoimprovethetherapeuticoutcome .METHODSSeventyninepatientswithseverepelvicfractureassociatedwithinjuriesofadjacentvisceratreatedinourDepartmentfromJanuary 1990toDecember 2 0 0 3werereviewedr…     

Surgical treatment of extraperitoneal rectal and perineal injuries

The aim of this study was to analyse the results of the treatment of extraperitoneal rectal and perineal injuries for 153 patients. All the patients were examined according to the scheme. Therapeutic-diagnostic algorithm was developed for perineal, anal, rectal injuries. Wide opening and drainage of the wound was used. The method allows to avoid colostomy and its subsequent operative closing in extraperitoneal injury of the rectum. The method of surgical treatment is recommended in extraperitoneal rectal and perineal injuries.     

Same admission colostomy closure (SACC). A new approach to rectal wounds: a prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this project were to study the healing of protected rectal wounds (RWs) using contrast enemas (CEs) and to establish the safety of same admission colostomy closure (SACC) in terms of colostomy closure (CC) and rectal wound-related outcomes, for selected patients with radiologically healed RWs. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Traditional treatment of RWs has included a diverting colostomy that is closed 2 or more months later during a readmission. METHODS: All patients admitted with a rectal injury were entered into this prospective study, treated with a diverting colostomy and presacral drainage, and managed according to a postoperative protocol that included a CE per anus to detect healing of the RW. Patients with no leaking on their first CE, no infection, and anal continence underwent SACC. RESULTS: From 1990 to 1993, 30 consecutive patients had rectal injuries, 90% of which resulted from gunshot wounds. The first CE was performed in 29 patients 5 to 10 days after injury. In this group, 21 patients did not and 8 did have leakage from their RWs. The proportions of RWs radiologically healed at 7 and 10 days after injury were 55.2% and 75%, respectively. Sixteen patients with a normal CE underwent SACC 9 to 19 days after injury (mean, 12.4 days). There were two fecal fistulas (2 of 7; 28.6%) after simple suture closure, none (0 of 9) after resection of the stoma with end-to-end anastomosis, and no RW-related complications after SACC. The mean hospitalization time was 17.4 days. CONCLUSIONS: The following conclusions were drawn: (1) CE confirmed healing of RWs in 75% of patients by 10 days after injury; (2) 60% of patients with RWs were candidates for SACC, and 53% were discharged with their colostomies closed; (3) SACC was performed without complications in 87.5% of patients with radiologically healed RWs; and (4) there were no RW-related complications after SACC.     

Management of civilian extraperitoneal rectal injuries

OBJECTIVE: The mortality and morbidity of rectal injuries are highly unsatisfactory. We retrospectively reviewed our experience with rectal injuries to draw some practical guidelines for management of such injuries. METHODS: The medical records of all patients diagnosed at our hospitals with full-thickness rectal injuries between 1994 and 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Full-thickness rectal injuries were identified in 23 patients; 19 patients had extraperitoneal injuries and four had both intra- and extraperitoneal injuries. The mean age was 33.5 years (range, 5-73 years). The mechanism of injury was penetrating in 11 patients, blunt in six, impalement in three and iatrogenic in three. Injuries were closed primarily in 17 patients, with variable combinations of adjunct procedures. Eight patients were treated without colostomy. Drainage and rectal washout were performed in 11 and six patients, respectively. Overall, 11 patients developed complications, including eight wound infections and five pelvic septic complications related to the rectal injury. Four of the five pelvic septic complications and all three deaths occurred in patients with shock, at least two associated-organ injuries and more than 6 hours' delay in treatment. CONCLUSION: Rectal injuries are serious additive mortality and morbidity factors in multi-injured patients. Regardless of treatment modality, wound infection is associated with shock at presentation and more than 6 hours' delay in treatment.     

Current management of large bowel injuries and factors influencing outcome

Background

Colonic and intra-peritoneal rectal injuries may be managed by primary repair and extra-peritoneal rectal injuries by diverting colostomy. This study was undertaken to document our experience with this approach and to identify factors which might impact on outcome.

Patients and methods

Prospective study of all patients treated for colon and rectal injuries in one surgical ward at King Edward VIII hospital, Durban, over a 7-year period (1998-2004). Demographic data, clinical presentation, findings at laparotomy and outcome were documented.

Results

Of 488 patients undergoing laparotomy, 177 (36%) had injuries to the colon and rectum with age 29.8 ± 10.9 years. Injury mechanisms were firearms (118) stabs (54) and blunt trauma (5). Delay before laparotomy was 10 ± 9.3 h. Complication and mortality rates were 36% and 17%, respectively. 68 patients (38%) required ICU management. Shock on admission and increased transfusion requirements were associated with a significantly increased mortality. Patients with delay ≤12 h before laparotomy had a higher mortality rate than those with delay >12 h. The mortality rate increased with the number of associated injuries and it was higher the higher the Injury Severity Score (ISS); it was similar for stabs, firearms and blunt trauma. Hospital stay was 9.5 ± 9.2 days.

Conclusion

We reaffirm that primary repair is appropriate for colonic and intra-peritoneal rectal injuries and that extra-peritoneal rectal injuries require diverting colostomy. Shock on admission, increased blood transfusion requirements, associated organ injury and severity of the injury were associated with high mortality.     

Rectal trauma: A retrospective analysis and guidelines for therapy

Twenty patients seen at Boston City Hospital required general or spinal anesthesia for rectal injuries, and 17 required laparotomy. Findings on sigmoidoscopy were falsely negative in 4 of 13 patients examined. Diagnosis was delayed in two patients. Associated injuries occurred in 55 percent, with the lower genitourinary tract being the area most frequently injured. Complications occurred in eight patients (40 percent). Abscess formation and bacteremia were the most common, but iatrogenic complications occurred in four patients. Pulmonary embolism occurred in two patients and was suspected in a third patient. Routine treatment included diverting colostomy with distal irrigation and adequate drainage. Repair of the injury was performed when possible. Two of the 20 patients (10 percent) died, one after a prolonged septic course and one from recurrent pulmonary embolism. Rectal trauma continues to be a challenging injury.     

Cystogram follow-up in the management of traumatic bladder disruption

BACKGROUND: The utility of obtaining a routine cystogram after the repair of intraperitoneal bladder disruption before urethral catheter removal is unknown. This study was designed to examine whether follow-up cystogram evaluation after traumatic bladder disruption affected the clinical management of these injuries. We hypothesized that routine cystograms, after operative repair of intraperitoneal bladder disruptions, provide no clinically useful information and may be eliminated in the management of these injuries. METHODS: Our prospectively collected trauma database was retrospectively reviewed for all ICD-9 867.0 and 867.1 coded bladder injuries over a 6-year period ending in June 2004. Demographics, clinical injury data, detailed operative records, and imaging studies were reviewed for each patient. Bladder injuries were categorized as intraperitoneal (IP) or extraperitoneal (EP) bladder disruptions based on imaging results and operative exploration. Patients with IP injuries were further subdivided into those with "simple" dome disruptions or through-and-through penetrating injuries and "complex" injuries involving the trigone or ureter reimplantation. All patients sustaining isolated ureteric or urethral injury were excluded from further analysis. RESULTS: In all, 20,647 trauma patients were screened for bladder injury. Out of this group, there were 50 IP (47 simple, 3 complex) and 37 EP injuries available for analysis. All IP injuries underwent operative repair. Eight of the IP injuries (all simple) had no postoperative cystogram and all were doing well at 1- to 4-week follow-up. The remaining 42 patients underwent a postoperative cystogram at 15.3 +/- 7.3 days (range 7 to 36 days). All simple IP injuries had a negative postoperative cystogram. The only positive study was in one of the three complex IP injuries. In the EP group, 21.6% had positive cystograms requiring further follow-up and intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Patients sustaining extraperitoneal and complex intraperitoneal bladder disruptions require routine cystogram follow-up. In those patients undergoing repair of a simple intraperitoneal bladder disruption, however, routine follow-up cystograms did not affect clinical management. Further prospective evaluation to determine the optimal timing of catheter removal in this patient population is warranted.     

Duhamel's procedure for adult Hirschsprung's disease

An adult presented with chronic constipation and abdominal mass. Clinical features, abdominal radiographs and barium enema revealed features consistent with Hirschsprung's disease. Full-thickness rectal biopsy was planned, but patient was lost to follow-up and presented 3 years later with intestinal obstruction. Exploratory laparotomy with resection of affected sigmoid colon and end colostomy were performed. Sequential rectal biopsies were obtained during the procedure to confirm the diagnosis. Later, Duhamel's procedure with a diverting loop ileostomy was successfully performed. Ileostomy reversal was done thereafter. There was complete resolution of symptoms and dramatic improvement in bowel function.     

Diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of rectal trauma. Blunt versus penetrating

In the last 6 years, nine patients with blunt and 16 with penetrating rectal injuries were treated at University Hospital, Jacksonville, Florida. Blunt trauma was caused by vehicular accidents in seven patients and crush injuries in two. Penetrating rectal trauma was due to gunshot wounds in ten patients and foreign body insertion in six. All patients with blunt injury had bright red rectal bleeding, which led to diagnostic sigmoidoscopy. Rectal injury was identified at sigmoidoscopy in 12 patients who had penetrating wounds and at laparotomy in four patients. Thirteen patients who had penetrating rectal trauma had injury to only the rectum or to one additional organ. In contrast, all patients who had blunt rectal trauma had at least three associated injuries. In the penetrating group, 13 patients were treated by colostomy and mucus fistula; three patients with mucosal injury were managed nonoperatively. The only death occurred in a patient whose rectal injury was initially missed. Patients who had blunt rectal trauma were managed with colostomy and mucus fistula. Three patients died postoperatively, two of pelvic bleeding and one of head injury. Hemodynamic stabilization, colostomy and mucus fistula, presacral drainage, and rectal washout constitute proper treatment of patients with blunt or penetrating rectal trauma. Because of the greater number and severity of associated injuries, morbidity and mortality are higher after blunt rectal trauma.     

Does colostomy prevent infection in open blunt pelvic fractures? A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Open pelvic fracture is a rare injury. Our aim in this study is to systematically review the literature to define when diverting colostomy is indicated to protect the patient from infection in open blunt pelvic fractures. METHODS: Papers studying open pelvic fractures and the use of colostomy were retrieved through MEDLINE and PUBMED. The papers were critically appraised regarding their methodology and conclusions. Relevant information was combined. RESULTS: The level of evidence for the use of colostomy in open pelvic fractures is very low. All reports are retrospective and no statistical methods have been used to support conclusions drawn. We found no difference in the overall infectious complication rate between the colostomy and noncolostomy groups. There is an assumption that patients with perineal wounds would benefit from colostomy; however, rectal involvement in these injuries was not detailed. CONCLUSION: The role of colostomy in open blunt pelvic fractures is unresolved and randomized multicenter trials are needed.     

简易腹膜外乙状结肠造口预防直肠癌Miles术后造口旁疝

目的:介绍一种直肠癌术后预防造口旁疝的简易肠造口制作方法.方法:对造口处的腹外斜肌腱膜主要作横形切开而不是十字形切开;腹膜外通道的建立是靠术者左手制作;在造口部位的缝合上不作过多层面的缝合,主要将结肠末端全层与皮肤真皮层间断缝合.结果:无1例发生造口旁疝.无1例发生造口坏死、造口脱垂、造口回缩、狭窄和肠梗阻等.结论:简易腹膜外乙状结肠造口不仅可预防miles术后造口旁疝,且制作方便.