Selective Non-operative Management of Patients with Abdominal Trauma—Is CECT Scan Mandatory?

CECT scan is considered essential for selective non-operative management (SNOM) of patients with abdominal trauma. However, CECT has its own hazards and limitations. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of selective non-operative management of patients with abdominal trauma without the mandatory use of CECT scan in a prospective study. Patients with peritonitis and ongoing intra-abdominal bleed were excluded. Consenting FAST positive, hemodynamically stable patients with blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma between 18 and 60 years of age were included and admitted for SNOM and detailed ultrasonography of the abdomen (in all) with or without CECT abdomen (selectively). Eighty-four patients with abdominal trauma were admitted during the study period. Twenty-two patients did not satisfy the inclusion criteria and 18 required immediate laparotomy based on primary survey. Remaining 44 patients were admitted for SNOM: mean?±?SD age of these patients was 27?±?8.7 years; 40 (89 %) were males. Thirty-five patients (79.54 %) sustained blunt trauma (RTI?=?16, Fall?=?16, others?=?3) while nine patients (20.45 %) sustained penetrating trauma. SNOM without CECT was successful in 36 (81.82 %) patients. Five (11.36 %) patients underwent delayed emergency laparotomy based on clinical and detailed USG evaluation. CECT was not done in these patients. Three patients underwent CECT for various reasons; however, they were managed with SNOM. Thus, SNOM without abdominal CECT was successful in 36 (81.82 %) patients. SNOM failed in five patients but abdominal USG was sufficient. SNOM can be practised safely in patients of abdominal trauma with limited use of CECT scan.     

Penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries in Quebec: implications for surgical training and maintenance of competence.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of penetrating trauma is low in Canada. Current recommendations for the care of patients with penetrating injuries originate from inner city trauma centres with a high volume of such injuries and may not apply to Canada. The purpose of this study was to review the incidence and treatment of penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries in the 4 tertiary trauma centres in Quebec. METHODS: We identified all patients with penetrating thoracic or abdominal injuries who were taken to any of the 4 tertiary trauma centres in the province of Quebec between Apr. 1, 1998, and Mar. 31, 2001. Patients who were dead on arrival were excluded. Only patients with an Abbreviated Injury Scale of 2 or greater for the thoracic or abdominal regions were included. RESULTS: In total, 245 patients meeting our inclusion criteria were identified. Of these 223 (91%) were male. The mean (and standard deviation) age was 33.8 (13.2) years; range 15-90 years. The median Injury Severity Score was 10 (range 4-75). Overall in-hospital mortality was 6.9%. There were 203 patients (82.8%) with thoracic injuries and 192 patients (78.4%) with abdominal injuries. Fifty (20.4%) of these patients had injuries to both regions. A thoracotomy was carried out in 48 (31.4%) of 153 patients who had injuries to the thorax, and the abdomen was explored in 133 (93.7%) of the 142 patients with abdominal injuries. The incidence of these injuries in the study period varied from 3 to 49 cases per centre. CONCLUSIONS: The annual incidence of penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries is extremely low in all 4 of Quebec's tertiary trauma centres, and the number of thoracoabdominal procedures is even lower. Such a low exposure may jeopardize education and clinical competence. We need to rethink our educational strategies both for residents and for continuing medical education. New approaches to training and maintenance of competence must be developed.     

Diagnosis and treatment of wounds of the gluteal area

The authors present results of surgical treatment of 98 patients with gluteal wounds. In 93.9% of cases the wounds were not penetrating and in 6.1% there were penetrating wounds. All the patients admitted to hospitals in state of shock as well as suspected to the penetrating character of the wound underwent general laparoscopy. In 2 patients with penetrating wounds of the abdominal cavity and in 7 patients with non-penetrating wounds ligation of the internal iliac artery was necessary because of huge bleeding. Two patients (2%) with penetrating wounds of the abdominal cavity died.     

Selective conservatism in penetrating abdominal wounds: a continuing reappraisal

Our experience with 829 patients with penetrating abdominal trauma treated in an Adult Trauma Service over 8 1/2 years managed by "selective conservatism" is reviewed, and 207 additional patients with blunt abdominal trauma handled in the same fashion were also studied. This pattern of management prompted exploratory celiotomy in only 29% of stab wounds and 54% of gunshot wounds. Overall mortality for penetrating abdominal wounds, including patients moribund on admission, was 2.5%. Overall mortality was 19.3% for blunt abdominal trauma. There were no deaths or errors in management in those patients definitively selected for nonoperative management. The philosophy of using specific objective indications for abdominal exploration in both penetrating and blunt abdominal trauma, especially when bolstered by routine abdominal paracentesis and lavage, is safe and reliable, and is adaptable to all clinical facilities.     

Use of laparoscopy in evaluation and treatment of penetrating and blunt abdominal injuries

Use of laparoscopy in penetrating trauma has been well established; however, its application in blunt trauma is evolving. The authors hypothesized that laparoscopy is safe and feasible as a diagnostic and therapeutic modality in both the patients with penetrating and blunt trauma. Trauma registry data and medical records of consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopy for abdominal trauma were reviewed. Over a 4-year period, 43 patients (18 blunt trauma / 25 penetrating trauma) underwent a diagnostic laparoscopy. Conversion to laparotomy occurred in 9 (50%) blunt trauma and 9 (36%) penetrating trauma patients. Diagnostic laparoscopy was negative in 33% of blunt trauma and 52% of penetrating trauma patients. Sensitivity/specificity of laparoscopy in patients with blunt and penetrating trauma was 92%/100% and 90%/100%, respectively. Overall, laparotomy was avoided in 25 (58%) patients. Use of laparoscopy in selected patients with blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma is safe, minimizes nontherapeutic laparotomies, and allows for minimal invasive management of selected intra-abdominal injuries.     

Successful management of abdominal stab wounds with clinical evaluation: experiences of an South-African trauma unit with 496 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND: Up to 80% of all operations performed in South African trauma units are due to penetrating injuries. This study will evaluate our own clinical guidelines for the management of penetrating abdominal injuries. METHODS: Absolute indication for operation in patients with penetrating abdominal injuries have been: haemodynamic instability, evisceration of bowels or organs, peritonitis, free air under the diaphragm on plain abdominal x-rays, the evidence of fresh blood on rectal examination or in the stomach. No ultrasonography or CT scanning has been performed. RESULTS: 496 patients were included in this study. In 248 (50%) patients an operation has been performed. 50 (20%) of them were initially selected for abdominal observation. In 230 (93%) patients, peritoneal penetration was diagnosed during laparotomy. In 18 (7%) patients the laparotomy was negative and in 24 (10%) non-therapeutic.6 (2%) patients died. Specifically 93.2% (CI 90.2-96.2%), positive prediction 92.7% (89.5%-95.7%). CONCLUSION: The clinical evaluation of patients with abdominal stab wounds is a safe method to detect possible fatal injuries in hospitals without unlimited access to ultrasonography and CT scanning. 80% of all patients with a selective conservative approach needed no operation.     

Abdominal wound injuries: diagnosis and treatment. Report of 79 cases

INTRODUCTION. - Traditionally, penetrating abdominal wounds justify routine laparotomy. However, this policy can be adapted to mechanism of injury (stab or firearm) and accuracy of imaging procedures if they eliminate visceral injury thus allowing close follow up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of 79 patients (May 1995-May 2002) with a penetrating abdominal wound: (47 (59%) stab wounds and 32 (41 %) firearm wounds). Correlation between imaging and surgical findings, treatment, post-operative course were studied. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients were operated on from the outset, and 11 underwent close follow-up. Of the 11 patients who had follow-up, (9 after stab wound and 2 after firearm wound), two had to be operated (1 in each group). Correlation between imaging and surgical findings was good in 34 (72%) patients after stab wound and in 21 (80%) after firearm wound; the mean number of visceral injuries was 1 and 3 respectively. Six patients (8%) died (mortality: 2% and 16% respectively), 12 (15%) had postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Penetrating abdominal stab wounds can be treated by close follow-up if imaging excludes visceral injury. Firearm wounds still justify routine laparotomy due to both multiplicity of visceral injuries and bad prognosis.     

Correlation of abdominal trauma index and injury severity score with abdominal septic complications in penetrating and blunt trauma.

The Abdominal Trauma Index (ATI) was designed to stratify patients with penetrating injuries, and has been used to classify patients with blunt trauma. The Injury Severity Score (ISS) was originally designed to stratify victims of blunt trauma, and it has also been used for victims of penetrating trauma. We attempted to validate the use of ISS and ATI for both penetrating and blunt trauma. A total of 592 penetrating and 334 blunt trauma patients who underwent laparotomy over a 5-year period were evaluated. The overall rate of abdominal sepsis was 7.5% for blunt trauma and 7.6% for penetrating trauma. Mortality (excluding deaths within 48 hours) was 7% for blunt trauma and 1% for penetrating trauma. In the penetrating injury population, an ATI value greater than 15 and an ATI value greater than 25 were significantly associated with abdominal septic complications (ASCs) (p less than 0.001, both comparisons). An ISS greater than or equal to 16 was also associated with ASCs (p less than 0.001). The ASC rate for gunshots was higher than that for stab wounds (11% vs. 2%; p less than 0.001). In the blunt group, an ATI value greater than 15 and an ATI value greater than 25 were associated with ASCs (p less than 0.01 and p less than 0.001, respectively). The association of ASCs and ISS was linear with increasing ISS in patients with blunt abdominal trauma.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Selective nonoperative management of penetrating abdominal solid organ injuries

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and safety of selective nonoperative management in penetrating abdominal solid organ injuries. BACKGROUND: Nonoperative management of blunt abdominal solid organ injuries has become the standard of care. However, routine surgical exploration remains the standard practice for all penetrating solid organ injuries. The present study examines the role of nonoperative management in selected patients with penetrating injuries to abdominal solid organs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective, protocol-driven study, which included all penetrating abdominal solid organ (liver, spleen, kidney) injuries admitted to a level I trauma center, over a 20-month period. Patients with hemodynamic instability, peritonitis, or an unevaluable abdomen underwent an immediate laparotomy. Patients who were hemodynamically stable and had no signs of peritonitis were selected for further CT scan evaluation. In the absence of CT scan findings suggestive of hollow viscus injury, the patients were observed with serial clinical examinations, hemoglobin levels, and white cell counts. Patients with left thoracoabdominal injuries underwent elective laparoscopy to rule out diaphragmatic injury. Outcome parameters included survival, complications, need for delayed laparotomy in observed patients, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 152 patients with 185 penetrating solid organ injuries. Gunshot wounds accounted for 70.4% and stab wounds for 29.6% of injuries. Ninety-one patients (59.9%) met the criteria for immediate operation. The remaining 61 (40.1%) patients were selected for CT scan evaluation. Forty-three patients (28.3% of all patients) with 47 solid organ injuries who had no CT scan findings suspicious of hollow viscus injury were selected for clinical observation and additional laparoscopy in 2. Four patients with a "blush" on CT scan underwent angiographic embolization of the liver. Overall, 41 patients (27.0%), including 18 cases with grade III to V injuries, were successfully managed without a laparotomy and without any abdominal complication. Overall, 28.4% of all liver, 14.9% of kidney, and 3.5% of splenic injuries were successfully managed nonoperatively. Patients with isolated solid organ injuries treated nonoperatively had a significantly shorter hospital stay than patients treated operatively, even though the former group had more severe injuries. In 3 patients with failed nonoperative management and delayed laparotomy, there were no complications. CONCLUSIONS: In the appropriate environment, selective nonoperative management of penetrating abdominal solid organ injuries has a high success rate and a low complication rate.     

Polytrauma with thoracic and/or abdominal injuries： experience in 1 540 cases

Objective:To investigate the early diagnosis and treatment of polytrauma patients with thoracic and/or abdominal injuries. Methods: The data of all polytrauma patients with thoracic and/or abdominal injuries during the past 10 years were studied retrospectively. Results: In the present study, there were 1 540 polytrauma patients, accounting for 65.0% of all 2368 trauma patients. Of these patients, 62.4% were in shock state on admission. The operative rates were 15.0% (181/1206) and 79.9% (612/766) in patients with thoracic and abdominal injury (P<0.01), 5.2% (39/758) and 31.7% ( 142/448 ) in patients with blunt and penetrating chest trauma (P<0.01). and 72.4% (359/496) and 93.7 % (253/270) in patients with blunt and penetrating abdominal injuries (P<0.01), respectively. To deal with abdominal injury, angioembolization was performed in 43 cases, with 42 cured. The overall mortality rate was 6.2%. And in the blunt and penetrating subgroups, the mortalities were 7.9% (75/950) and 3.6% (21/590), respectively (P<0.01). Most patients died from exsanguination. Conclusions: The first "golden hour" after trauma should be grasped, since the treatment in this hour can determine greatly whether the critically-injured victim could survive. Prompt diagnosis and proper treatment contribute more greatly to the survival of the victim than the severity of injury.     

Management of penetrating and blunt diaphragmatic injury

The past 5 years' experience with diaphragmatic injuries at the University of Texas Health Science Center in San Antonio was reviewed to refine the clinical signs and appropriate treatment. During this period 102 patients were treated. Ninety-three patients incurred penetrating trauma to the diaphragm and nine patients suffered blunt trauma. Chest X-rays were normal in 40 patients, a hemo- and/or pneumothorax was present in 57, herniated abdominal viscera in four, and free air in one. Peritoneal lavage was positive in six of seven patients with blunt diaphragmatic injury, but was falsely negative in two of five patients (20%) with penetrating diaphragmatic injury. Eighty-nine patients (87%) experienced 137 associated injuries (excluding hemo- and/or pneumothorax). Nine patients (8.8%) had an isolated diaphragmatic injury. Four patients (4%) had a diaphragmatic injury associated with only a hemo- and/or pneumothorax. All patients, except for three with injuries recognized late, were operated upon immediately. Two patients had a missed diaphragmatic injury at initial laparotomy. There was one death in the series from a consumption coagulopathy. It was concluded that injuries to the diaphragm should be suspected in all patients with severe blunt torso trauma or with penetrating injuries near the diaphragm. Because of the nonspecificity of X-rays and the 20% false negative rate for peritoneal lavage, we believe that missed injuries and morbidity can be minimized by immediate laparotomy for all patients with abdominal and low thoracic penetrating injuries. Care must be taken not to overlook associated injuries.     

Hospital management of abdominal trauma in Tehran, Iran: a review of 228 patients

Objective: Today, trauma is a major public health problem in some countries. Abdominal trauma is the source of significant mortality and morbidity with both blunt and penetrating injuries. We performed an epidemiological study of abdominal trauma (AT) in Tehran, Iran. We used all our sources to describe the epidemiology and outcome of patients with AT.Methods: This study was done in Tehran. The study population included trauma patients admitted to the emergency department of six general hospitals in Tehran during one year. The data were collected through a questionnaire that was completed by a trained physician at the trauma center. The statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS software (version 11.5 for Windows). The statistical analysis was conducted using the chi-square and P＜0.05 was accepted as being statistically significant.Results: Two hundred and twenty-eight (2.8%) out of 8 000 patients were referred to the above mentioned centers with abdominal trauma. One hundred and twenty-five (54.9%)of the patients were in their 2nd and 3rd decades of life and 189 (83%) of our patients were male. Road traffic accidents (RTA) were the leading cause of AT with 119 (52.2%) patients. Spleen was the commonly injured organ with 51 cases. Following the analysis of injury severity, 159 (69.7%) patients had mild injuries (ISS＜16) and 69 (30.3%) patients had severe injuries (ISS= 16). The overall mortality rate was 46 (20.2%).Conclusions: Blunt abdominal trauma is more common than penetrating abdominal trauma. Road traffic accidents and stab wound are the most common causes of blunt and penetrating trauma, respectively. Spleen is the most commonly injured organ in these patients. The mortality rate is higher in blunt trauma than penetrating one.     

The contribution of laparoscopy in evaluation of penetrating abdominal wounds

BACKGROUND: Penetrating abdominal wounds are traditionally explored by laparotomy. We investigated prospectively the role of laparoscopy within a defined protocol for management of penetrating abdominal wounds to determine its safety and advantages over traditional operative management. STUDY DESIGN: The study inclusion criteria were: stab and gun shot abdominal wounds, including junction zone injuries; stable vital signs; and absence of contraindications for laparoscopy. Diagnostic end points included detection of peritoneum or diaphragm violation, visceral injuries, and other indications for laparotomy. Systematic examination was undertaken using a multiport technique whenever the peritoneum or diaphragm had been violated. All repairs were done by open operation. RESULTS: A total of 40.6% of patients with penetrating trauma fulfilled study criteria (52 patients). Of these, 33% had no peritoneal penetration; 29% had no visceral injuries despite violation of peritoneum or diaphragm; 38% had visceral injuries, of which 40% (mainly liver and omentum) required no intervention. Twelve patients (23% of total) had open repairs. No missed injuries or death occurred in the study. Overall, 77% of penetrating injuries with stable vital signs avoided exploratory laparotomy. Compared with National Trauma Data Bank information for patients with the same Injury Severity Scores, hospitalization was reduced by more than 55% for the entire series. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy for penetrating abdominal injuries in a defined set of conditions was safe and accurate, effectively eliminating nontherapeutic laparotomy and shortening hospitalization.     

Evaluation of antibiotic therapy following penetrating abdominal trauma.

Postoperative infection accounts for significant morbidity and mortality following penetrating abdominal trauma. During a 2 1/2-year period, December 1980 through June 1983, 257 patients sustaining penetrating abdominal injury were initially treated at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas. Following the patient's written consent, they were prospectively randomized to receive, prior to surgery, intravenous clindamycin 600 mg every 6 hours and tobramycin 1.2 mg/kg every 6 hours (CT), or cefamandole 1 gm every 4 hours (M), or cefoxitin 1 gm every 4 hours (C). The antibiotics were continued for 48 hours. Major organ injuries in the three groups were comparable. The overall infection rate was significantly less in the cefoxitin group (13%), compared to cefamandole at 29%, and was comparable to the combination of clindamycin/tobramycin at 20%. The most significant difference followed colon injury. There were 96 patients who sustained colon injuries and the infection rate was CT 33%, M 62%, and C 19% (p = 0.002). If nonoperative wound infections were excluded from the colon group and only severe infections were evaluated, the infection rate was CT 18%, M 38%, and C 13% (p = 0.021). The infection rate was higher in the shock patients and tended to increase as age increased. Enterococcus, Escherichia coli, and Klebsiella pneumoniae were the most frequent aerobes isolated along with anaerobes. Five of six Bacteroides isolates from major infections occurred in the cefamandole group; two of which were in bacteremic patients. The hospital stay corresponded with infection rates, being 11.4 days (CT), 13.1 days (M), and 9.4 days (C). The results of this study indicate that cefoxitin is comparable to the combination of clindamycin/tobramycin and superior to cefamandole when used before surgery in patients sustaining penetrating abdominal trauma. The study suggests that antibiotic coverage should be against aerobes and anaerobes. Routine administration of an aminoglycoside is unnecessary.     

The management of penetrating injuries of the back. A prospective study of 230 patients.

This is a prospective study of 230 patients with penetrating injuries of the back. The decision to operate or observe was taken exclusively on the abdominal physical findings. One hundred ninety-five patients (85%) did not require operation, 30 (13%) underwent a therapeutic laparotomy, four (1.7%) an unnecessary operation, and one patient (0.4%) had a completely negative laparotomy. The diagnosis and management was delayed in five (2.2%) patients with no serious consequences. Mortality rates were not recorded in this series. The initial physical examination was accurate in 95.2% of the patients. We suggest that penetrating injuries of the back should be assessed in the same way as anterior abdominal injuries. Physical abdominal examination is reliable in detecting significant intra-abdominal injuries.     

Delayed traumatic superior mesenteric arteriovenous fistula after a stab wound: case report.

Eight cases of superior mesenteric arteriovenous fistula (SMAVF) occurring after an abdominal stab wound have been reported. Seven of these patients manifested symptoms within 1 month after the stab wound. We report the case of a 28-year-old man whose SMAVF occurred 31 months after an abdominal stab wound. A SMAVF must be considered even when considerable time has elapsed between penetrating abdominal trauma and symptoms of abdominal pain, unexplained diarrhea, or an abdominal bruit or thrill.     

Clinical retrospective and comparative study on diaphragm injuries in 46 cases

ａｕｍａｔｉｃｄｉａｐｈｒａｇｍｒｕｐｔｕｒｅｉｓｎｏｔｃｏｍｍｏｎｉｎｃｌｉｎｉｃａｌｗｏｒｋ ,ａｎｄｔｈｅｉｎｊｕｒｙｉｓｖｅｒｙｓｅｒｉｏｕｓａｎｄｔｈｅｍｏｒｔａｌｉｔｙｉｓｈｉｇｈ .Ｔｈｅａｉｍｏｆｐｒｅｓｅｎｔｓｔｕｄｙｗａｓｔｏｅｌｕｃｉｄａｔｅｔｈｅｃｌｉｎｉｃａｌｃｈａｒａｃｔｅｒｉｓｔｉｃｓｏｆｂｌｕｎｔａｎｄｐｅｎｅｔｒａｔｉｎｇｄｉａｐｈｒａｇｍｉｎｊｕｒｉｅｓａｎｄｔｏｑｕａｎｔｉｔａｔｉｖｅｌｙｃｏｍｐａｒｅｔｈｅｓｅｖｅｒｉｔｙｏｆｄｉｆｆｅｒｅｎｔｄｉａｐｈｒａｇ…     

Non-operative management of abdominal stab wounds--an analysis of 186 patients

BACKGROUND: The modern management of abdominal stab wounds remains controversial and subject to continued reappraisal. In the present study we reviewed patients with abdominal stab wounds to examine and validate a policy of selective non-operative management with serial physical abdominal examination in a busy urban trauma centre with a high incidence of penetrating trauma. METHODS: Over a 12-month period (2005), the records of all patients with abdominal stab wounds were reviewed. Patients with abdominal stab wounds presenting with peritonitis, haemodynamic instability, organ evisceration and high spinal cord injury underwent emergency laparotomy. No local wound exploration, diagnostic peritoneal lavage or ultrasound was used. Haematuria in patients without an indication for emergency surgery was investigated with a contrasted computed tomography (CT) scan. Patients selected for non-operative management were admitted for serial clinical abdominal examination for 24 hours. Patients in whom abdominal findings were negative were given a test feed. If food was tolerated, they were discharged with an abdominal injury form. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-six patients with abdominal stab wounds were admitted. There were 171 (91.9%) males, with a mean age of 29.5 years. Seventy-four patients (39.8%) underwent emergency laparotomy. There were 5 negative laparotomies (6.8%). The remaining 112 patients (60.2%) were assigned for abdominal observation. One hundred (89.3%) of these patients were successfully managed non-operatively. The remaining 12 patients underwent delayed laparotomy, which was negative in 2 cases (16.7%). Non-operative management was successful in 53.8% of patients overall. The overall sensitivity and specificity of serial abdominal examination was 87.3% and 93.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Serial physical examination alone for asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients with abdominal stab wounds enables a significant reduction in unnecessary laparotomies.     

Canadian Association of General Surgeons evidence based reviews in surgery. 12. Primary repair for penetrating colon injuries.

Objective: To determine if the treatment of penetrating colonic injury must include fecal diversion at or proximal to the injury, to avoid sepsis and mortality. Data source: Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE 1966–2001, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry and EMBASE. Study selection: Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes of primary repair versus fecal diversion in the management of penetrating colon injuries; 5 studies were identified. Outcome measures: Operative mortality, total complications, total infectious complications, intra-abdominal infections, abdominal infections excluding dehiscence, and wound complications including and excluding dehiscence. Penetrating abdominal trauma index (PATI) and length of stay were included when available. Results: PATI did not significantly differ between groups; neither did mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51–5.66). However, total complications (OR 0.28, CI 0.18–0.42), total infectious complications (OR 0.41, CI 0.27–0.63), intra-abdominal infections (OR 0.59, CI 0.38–0.94), abdominal infections excluding dehiscence (OR 0.52, CI 0.31–0.86) and wound complications including (OR 0.55, CI 0.34–0.89) and excluding dehiscence (OR 0.43, CI 0.25–0.76) all significantly favoured primary repair. Conclusions: Primary repair of penetrating colon injuries is as safe as fecal diversion and has a lower complication rate.     

Expectant management in delayed presentation of war casualties with penetrating abdominal trauma

IntroductionWhile the management of acute civilian abdominal injuries is well established, The literature regarding the management of battle-related abdominal injuries presented in a delayed fashion is scarce. The objective of this study was to investigate the safety of non-operative management approach in delayed evacuation of battle-related abdominal injuries.MethodsClinical records of thirty-seven hemodynamically normal patients with battle related injuries and Computed Tomography (CT) findings of penetrating abdominal trauma were retrospectively studied.ResultsAll 37 patients suffered penetrating abdominal injuries during the civil war in Syria. In this complex scenario, the casualties presented after a minimum 12-hour delay to our hospital. All patients had abnormal abdominal CT scans with no clinical peritoneal signs. Twenty-one [of the 37] patients exhibited 29 hard signs on CT scan. Of these, 17 patients were treated non-operatively and 4 underwent exploratory laparotomy (of which 2 were non-therapeutic). Sixteen patients exhibited a total of 75 soft signs on CT scan; 15 were treated non-operatively and one underwent non-therapeutic laparotomy. No complications were recorded in either the operative or non-operative groups. In total, 32 patients (86%) were treated non-operatively. Five patients (14%) underwent exploratory laparotomy (3 of which were non-therapeutic). Length of stay was dependent on the unique requirements of each individual patient as determined by the state department for returning across the border.ConclusionWe propose that in battle related casualties, acute survivable penetrating abdominal trauma may be safely treated non-operatively in selected patients who are hemodynamically normal and in whom there is an absence of abdominal pain or tenderness on repeated clinical assessment.