Emergency laparoscopy for abdominal stab wounds

Background: Management strategies for abdominal stab wounds (ASW) in initially asymptomatic patients range from mandatory explorative laparotomy (EL) to conservative approaches with observation alone. Emergency diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) may play a potential role between these two extremes—hence lowering the rate of unnecessary laparotomies and keeping the rate of missed injuries to a minimum. Patients and Methods: At our institution mandatory EL was carried out in every patient with ASW until 1992. In a retrospective study the charts of 43 patients with ASW were reviewed in terms of initial diagnostic procedures, intraabdominal injuries, and course and length of hospital stay. Between 5/1993 and 4/1995 DL was performed in a prospective study in 15 patients with suspected peritoneal penetration (PP) after ASW according to a standardized diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm. Results: In 17 patients (40%) EL showed no PP; 15 (35%) had significant intraabdominal injuries, while 11 patients with PP didn't have lacerations of intraabdominal organs, resulting in an overall rate of nontherapeutic laparotomy of 65%. Mortality was 6% (n= 3), average hospital stay 8 days. Primary DL could exclude PP in 10 out of 15 patients (66%). The remaining five patients (33%) showed PP: In two patients with ASW to the right upper quadrant, intraabdominal injuries could be excluded by DL, and in one patient a low-grade liver injury was treated laparoscopically, thus avoiding laparotomy in a total of 87% (n= 13). In two patients with PP laparoscopy was converted to laparotomy: no pathological finding in one case, splenectomy for spleen laceration in the second patient, resulting in a rate of nontherapeutic laparotomies of 7%. All patients in this series had an uneventful course; average hospital stay was 2.4 days. Conclusions: DL offers an important diagnostic tool in excluding peritoneal penetration in ASW, hence lowering the rate of unnecessary laparotomies. Given experience and skills, laparoscopy may be used therapeutically in selected cases of ASW. Received: 24 February 1997/Accepted: 10 August 1997     

Impact of laparoscopy on the perioperative outcomes of penetrating abdominal trauma

BackgroundPenetrating abdominal trauma (PAT) poses a significant challenge to trauma surgeons. Laparotomy is still the most popular procedure for managing PAT but has high morbidity and mortality rates. Presently, laparoscopy aims to provide equal or superior visualization compared to open approaches but with less morbidity, postoperative discomfort, and recovery time. The aim of this research is to assess the impact of laparoscopy on the management of PAT.MethodsThis was a retrospective observational study carried out at the Emergency Hospital of Mansoura University/Egypt and at King Faisal Medical Complex, Taif/KSA from September 2014 to September 2018. All hemodynamically stable patients with PAT who were managed by laparoscopy were included in this study. Data extracted for analysis included demographic information, criteria of abdominal stabs, type of management, and perioperative outcome.ResultsForty patients were recruited in this research and the male-to-female ratio was 5.6:1. The mean age of the patients was 31.4 ± 12.318 years. During the laparoscopic procedure, no peritoneal penetration was observed in 4 patients (negative laparoscopy), while peritoneal penetration was observed in the remaining 36 patients. No visceral injuries were noted in 2 patients of the 36 patients with peritoneal penetration, while the remaining 34 patients had intra-abdominal injuries.ConclusionLaparoscopy performed on hemodynamically stable trauma patients was found to be safe and technically feasible. It also reduced negative and non-therapeutic laparotomies and offered paramount therapeutic and diagnostic advantages for traumatic diaphragmatic injuries.     

Cost analysis of diagnostic laparoscopy vs laparotomy in the evaluation of penetrating abdominal trauma

Background: Diagnostic laparoscopy for the evaluation of injuries in patients with penetrating abdominal trauma has been shown to decrease the morbidity and mortality associated with mandatory laparotomy. The overall impact on patient care and hospital costs has not been thoroughly investigated. The goal of this study was to determine the economic impact of laparoscopy as a diagnostic tool in the management of patients following penetrating trauma to the abdomen or flank. Methods: Retrospective chart review of all hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating trauma to the abdomen or flank, but without other injuries requiring emergent intervention, admitted to a level I trauma center between January 1, 1992, and September 30, 1994. Those patients who underwent either laparoscopy (DL) or laparotomy (NL) or both (CONV) and who had no intraabdominal organ injuries requiring surgical therapeutic intervention were included in the study. Age, operative time, operative findings, length of hospitalization, Injury Severity Score (ISS), variable costs, and total costs were recorded for each patient. Results: Fourteen patients underwent negative/nontherapeutic laparoscopy (DL), 19 patients underwent negative/nontherapeutic laparotomy (NL), and four patients underwent both laparoscopy and laparotomy, a conversion procedure (CONV). There was no significant difference in age, operative times, or ISS between the DL and NL groups. Mean ISS of CONV patients was significantly greater than that of DL patients, 5.75 ± 1.97 vs 2.43 ± 0.63 (p < 0.05). Mean operative time for CONV patients was also significantly greater than both DL and NL patients, 106.5 ± 17.00 min vs 66.1 ± 6.55 and 47.3 ± 7.50 min, respectively (p < 0.05). The mean length of stay was significantly shorter in the DL group as compared to the NL or CONV groups, 1.43 ± 0.20 vs 4.26 ± 0.31 and 5.0 ± 0.82 (p < 0.0001). The variable costs for the DL group were significantly lower than those incurred by patients in the NL and CONV groups, $2,917 ± 175 vs $3,384 ± 102 and $3,774 ± 286, (p < 0.05). Variable costs were not significantly different between the NL and CONV groups. Total costs were also significantly lower in the DL group when compared to NL and CONV, $5,427 ± 394 vs $7,026 ± 251 and $7,855 ± 750 (p < 0.005), but again, they were not statistically different between the NL and CONV groups. The overall total costs for laparoscopy, including the costs incurred by conversion patients, was significantly less than the total costs for laparotomy patients, $5,664 ± 394 vs $7,028.47 ± 250 (p < 0.005). This resulted in an overall savings of $1,059.44 per laparoscopy performed. The overall negative/nontherapeutic laparotomy rate during this study was 19.1%, which was significantly lower than the negative or nontherapeutic exploration rate during the time period prior to the use of laparoscopy (p < 0.01, z = 2.550). Conclusion: Variable and total costs and length of stay were significantly lower in our population of patients who underwent DL as compared to NL. The rate of negative or nontherapeutic laparotomy was also significantly reduced when compared to the rate identified during the era prior to the use of laparoscopy. Laparoscopy resulted in an overall savings of $1,059 per laparoscopy performed when compared to laparotomy. Received: 11 March 1996/Accepted: 5 July 1996     

Selective celiotomy for missile wounds of the abdomen based on laparoscopy

The role of laparoscopy in the selective management of gunshot wounds (GSW) of the abdomen was prospectively investigated in 38 patients. All the patients were hemodynamically stable and had equivocal evidence of intraabdominal penetration. Laparoscopy was performed in the operating room under anesthesia. The site of penetration was in the thoracoabdominal area in 13, epigastrium in 7, and lower quadrants in 18. Twenty-three (60.5%) had nonpenetration on laparoscopy and a laparotomy was avoided. The remaining patients had injuries to the liver (4 patients), spleen (two patients), diaphragm (3 patients), hemoperitoneum or retroperitoneal hematoma (6 patients), and hollow viscus injuries (5 patients). Laparoscopy was also helpful in determining the need for laparotomy vs thoracotomy in lower chest wounds. The negative laparoscopy group (no penetration) had a significantly lower hospital stay compared to hemodynamically stable patients who had negative laparotomy without laparoscopy for nonpenetrating GSW. There were no complications related to laparoscopy. Laparoscopy is a useful modality in the evaluation of hemodynamically stable patients with abdominal missile wounds.Presented at the annual meeting of the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), Phoenix, Arizona, USA, 3 April 1993     

Laparoscopy in penetrating abdominal trauma

Summary BACKGROUND: Penetrating abdominal trauma (PAT) poses a significant challenge to trauma surgeons. There is no doubt that persistent hemodynamic instability or signs of peritoneal irritation warrant immediate laparotomy. If the patient is hemodynamically stable and has equivocal abdominal examination findings, diagnosis may be obtained by laparoscopy. METHODS: The goal of this article is to evaluate the role of laparoscopy in the management of PAT. RESULTS: Patients with penetrating trauma to the thoracoabdominal and anterior abdominal wall are good candidates for laparoscopic evaluation. The peritoneal cavity and its contents, including the retroperitoneal space, can be thoroughly examined easily and safely. The main benefits of laparoscopy include the reduction of nontherapeutic laparotomies, identification of mostly intra-abdominal injury, and provision of potential therapy for some cases. Diagnostic laparoscopy has a high overall diagnostic accuracy, reduced morbidity, and shortened hospital stay and is also cost-effective. While laparoscopy has some limitations in the diagnosis of hollow viscus injury, it can detect and repair diaphragmatic injuries accurately and exclude the risk of nontherapeutic laparotomy due to a nonbleeding injury of the solid organs. CONCLUSIONS: The use of laparoscopy as a diagnostic or therapeutic method in patients with PAT is reserved only for hemodynamically stable patients and uncertain findings of peritonitis. Laparoscopy is an efficient and effective diagnostic tool when used by a well-trained surgeon. With experience, an increasing number of surgeons are using laparoscopy as an additional diagnostic tool for PAT in stable patients. With more experience and skills, laparoscopy may be used more therapeutically in selected patients. Minimally invasive surgery has already established itself as a useful tool in the management of PAT. The future seems to be promising for this field of surgery by innovative developments in computer technology and robotic systems.     

Use of computed tomography in the initial evaluation of anterior abdominal stab wounds

Background

The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of computed tomography (CT) to facilitate initial management decisions in patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted of patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds who underwent CT over 4.5 years. Any abnormality suspicious for intra-abdominal injury was considered a positive finding on CT.

Results

Ninety-eight patients met the study's inclusion criteria. Positive findings on CT were noted in 30 patients (31%), leading to operative intervention in 67%. Injuries were confirmed in 95% of cases, but only 70% were therapeutic. Ten patients had nonoperative management despite positive findings on CT, including 5 patients with solid organ injuries. One patient underwent operative intervention for clinical deterioration, with negative findings. No computed tomographic evidence of injury was noted in the remaining 68 patients (69%), but 1 patient was noted to have a splenic injury while undergoing operative evaluation of the diaphragm. All remaining patients were treated nonoperatively with success.

Conclusions

In patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds, CT should be considered to facilitate initial management decisions, as it has the ability to delineate abnormalities suspicious for injury.     

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.     

腹腔镜技术在诊治腹部穿透伤中的应用评价

目的:本研究通过分析我院应用腹腔镜技术诊断和治疗腹部穿透伤病人的具体资料,探讨腹腔镜技术在诊治腹部穿透伤中的应用价值。方法:2007年1月至2010年12月,我院收治的腹部穿透伤142例病人中,39例采用非手术治疗,86例采用腹腔镜探查手术,17例采用开腹探查手术。结果:在86例采用腹腔镜探查手术的病例中,51例在腹腔镜下完成止血、修补等治疗;19例因出血迅猛、腹腔污染严重及病变难以处理而中转开腹手术;16例探查阴性。结论:腹腔镜技术在腹部穿透伤的处理中兼具诊断和治疗的作用,避免了一些不必要的开腹手术,从而取代了很多开腹手术;有创伤小,恢复快等优势,有一定的应用价值。     

The role of laparoscopy in penetrating abdominal stab wounds

The role of diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) in abdominal stab wounds (ASWs) is not clearly defined. We hypothesized that peritoneal penetration (PP) during DL was a valid indication to convert to an exploratory laparotomy (EL). Retrospective review of hemodynamically stable ASWs requiring operation. A total of 161 patients with ASWs were identified, with 36 of 92 patients (39.1%) undergoing DL converted to EL. All 36 patients had PP; 20 of 36 (55.6%) ELs were therapeutic (TL). The number of nontherapeutic laparotomies (NTLs) prevented was 56 (60.9%). Five of 92 patients had PP on DL but did not undergo EL. Twenty-four of 69 patients who underwent initial EL had an NTL (34.8%). If this group had undergone an initial DL, and PP was used to determine need for EL, the number of NTLs would have been reduced to 10 (14.5%), a 58.3% reduction. Evidence of PP during DL is a reasonable indicator to determine the need for EL and reduce the number of NTLs.     

Diagnostic laparoscopy for the evaluation of occult diaphragmatic injury following penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma

BACKGROUND: Occult diaphragmatic injury following penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma can be difficult to diagnose. Radiographic findings are often non-specific or absent. Undetected injuries may remain clinically silent, only to present later with life-threatening complications associated with diaphragmatic herniation. Diagnostic laparoscopy allows for the evaluation of trauma patients lacking clinical indications for a formal laparotomy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of occult diaphragmatic injury and investigate the role of laparoscopy in patients with penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma who lack indications for exploratory laparotomy except the potential for a diaphragmatic injury. METHODS: Haemodynamically stable patients with penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma without indications for laparotomy (haemodynamic instability, evisceration, or peritonitis on exam) and evaluated with diagnostic laparoscopy to determine the presence of a diaphragmatic injury were retrospectively reviewed. Thoracoabdominal wounds were defined as wounds bounded by the nipple line over the anterior and posterior chest superiorly and the costal margin inferiorly. RESULTS: One hundred and eight patients were evaluated for penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries (80 stabs and 28 gunshots) over the study period. 22 (20%) diaphragmatic injuries were identified. These were associated with injuries to the spleen (5), stomach (3) and liver (2). There was a greater incidence of haemopneumothorax (HPTX) in patients with diaphragmatic injury (32%) compared to those without injury (20%). 29% of patients with a HPTX had a diaphragmatic injury. However, 18% of patients with a normal chest radiograph were also found to have a diaphragmatic injury. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of diaphragmatic injury associated with penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma is high. Clinical and radiographic findings can be unreliable for detecting occult diaphragmatic injury. Diagnostic laparoscopy provides a vital tool for detecting occult diaphragmatic injury among patients who have no other indications for formal laparotomy.     

The utility of diagnostic laparoscopy in the evaluation of anterior abdominal stab wounds

Background

To assess if diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) is superior to nonoperative modes (serial abdominal examination with/without computed axial tomography [CAT] and diagnostic peritoneal lavage) in determining the need for therapeutic laparotomy (TL) after anterior abdominal stab wound (ASW).

Methods

Retrospective review of ASW patients. Patients were divided into group A (DL/exploratory laparotomy) to identify peritoneal violation (PV) and group B (initial nonoperative modes).

Results

Seventy-three patients met inclusion criteria. In group A (n = 38), 29 patients (76%) had PV by DL and underwent exploratory laparotomy. Only 10 (35%) underwent TL (sensitivity for PV = 100%; specificity and positive predictive value of PV in determining need for TL = 29% and 33%, respectively). In group B (n = 35), 7 patients (20%) underwent TL, yielding an improved specificity (96%) and positive predictive value (88%).

Conclusions

We find no role for DL in the evaluation of ASW patients solely to determine PV.     

The correlation between stabbing-related upper extremity wounds and survival of stabbing victims with abdominal and thoracic injuries

BackgroundWhen treating patients with stab injuries of the torso, clinicians often lack timely information about the degree and nature of internal organ damage. An externally observable sign significantly associated with characteristics of torso injuries may therefore be useful for practitioners. One such potential sign is the presence of wounds to the hands, sometimes sustained during victims' attempt to defend themselves during the violent altercation. Thus, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate the association between presence of upper extremity wounds and the severity of the thoracic and intra-abdominal injuries due to stabbing.MethodsThis study was carried out retrospectively using data on 8714 patients with stabbing-related injuries from 19 trauma centers that participated in the Israeli National Trauma Registry (INTR) between January 1st1997 and December 31st 2013. Patients with wounds of upper extremities in addition to torso injuries (UE group) were compared to other patients with torso injuries (TO group) in terms of demographics, injury characteristics and clinical outcome.ResultsThe compared groups were found to be homogeneous in terms of age and systolic blood pressure; the number of sustained torso injuries was also identical. The UE group comprised a slightly greater percentage of females, however both groups were predominantly male. Patients with upper extremity injuries had a lower proportion of internal organ damage (36% vs. 38.5%) and lower mortality (0.9% vs. 2%). The higher mortality of patients without upper extremity wounds remained significantly different even when adjusted by other epidemiological parameters (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.33–5.08).The number of sustained upper extremity injuries was positively associated with deeper penetration of the torso by the stabbing instrument.ConclusionsPatients with stabbing-related upper extremity wounds had a significant survival advantage over patients without such injuries. However, a greater number of sustained upper extremity wounds may be an external sign of greater severity of thoracic and intraabdominal stabbing injuries.     

The urban injury severity score (UISS) better predicts mortality following penetrating gunshot wounds (GSW)

Background

The Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the New ISS (NISS) underscore injury severity after GSW. This study assesses the Urban ISS (UISS), which incorporates all injuries.

Nonoperative management of pelvic gunshot wounds

Background

The nonoperative management (NOM) of abdominal gunshot injuries is gradually becoming the standard of care. Patients with pelvic gunshot injuries constitute a subgroup of patients at high risk of visceral injury. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of the selective NOM of pelvic gunshot injuries.

Patients and methods

This prospective study was performed from April 1, 2004, to November 30, 2008. Patients with pelvic gunshot injuries underwent laparotomy for peritonitis, hemodynamic instability, rectal bleeding, and urologic injuries. Patients with benign abdominal findings with hematuria underwent computed tomography scanning with intravenous contrast. Stable patients with no tenderness or minimal tenderness confined to the wound or wound tract underwent serial abdominal examination. Outcome parameters included need for delayed laparotomy, complications, length of hospital stay, and survival.

Results

During the 54-month study period, 239 patients with pelvic gunshot injuries were treated. One hundred seventy-six (73.6%) patients underwent immediate laparotomy, whereas 63 (26.4%) were selected for NOM. The nontherapeutic laparotomy rate was 4.5% in the former group, and no patient required delayed laparotomy in the latter group. Also, 3 patients with minor extraperitoneal bladder injuries were successfully managed nonoperatively. Associated injuries included mostly fractures to the bony pelvis including the iliac blade (19), pubic ramii (3), and acetabulum (3). The mean hospital stay was 2.2 (range 1–8) days in the nonoperative group of patients. There were no deaths.

Conclusions

Selective NOM of pelvic gunshot injuries is a feasible, safe, and effective alternative to routine laparotomy.     

Diagnostic laparoscopy for penetrating injuries in the thoracoabdominal region

Background The role of laparoscopy in diagnosis of penetrating abdominal injuries is still controversial. In the present investigation diagnostic laparoscopy was studied in penetrating injuries of the thoracoabdominal region.Methods Between March 1998 and June 2003, 43 patients with penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries underwent diagnostic laparoscopy at the Rambam Medical Center. There were 41 males and two females; the average age was 30 years (range, 16–54 years). Thirty-one patients had a lower chest injury, eight patients had an upper abdomen and flank injury, and four patients had combined chest and abdomen injuries. In 11 patients intraperitoneal penetration was diagnosed. In 10 patients the procedure was converted to open laparotomy, and one patient with a small laceration of the right diaphragm opposite the liver was observed without laparotomy.Results The average operating time for the laparoscopy was 25 min (10–45 min), and 85 min (40–175 min) for laparotomy. Patients who underwent laparoscopy were discharged after an average of 1.6 (1–3) days, while those who underwent laparotomy were discharged after an average of 7.6 (2–15) days.Conclusions Laparoscopy is a useful diagnostic tool in penetrating injuries of the chest, thoracoabdominal region, and flank. This procedure is particularly reliable in diaphragmatic tears. Laparoscopy should be considered the procedure of choice for the evaluation of penetrating injuries of the lower chest and upper abdomen for diagnosis of peritoneal penetration.     

Selective non-operative management of penetrating liver injuries at a UK tertiary referral centre

Introduction

Selective non-operative management (SNOM) of penetrating abdominal injuries has increasingly been applied in North America in the last decade. However, there is less acceptance of SNOM among UK surgeons and there are limited data on UK practice. We aimed to review our management of penetrating liver injuries and, specifically, the application of SNOM.

Methods

A retrospective review was performed of patients presenting with penetrating liver injuries between June 2005 and November 2013.

Results

Thirty-one patients sustained liver injuries due to penetrating trauma. The vast majority (97%) were due to stab wounds. The median injury severity score was 14 and a quarter of patients had concomitant thoracic injuries. Twelve patients (39%) underwent immediate surgery owing to haemodynamic instability, evisceration, retained weapon or diffuse peritonism. Nineteen patients were stable to undergo computed tomography (CT), ten of whom were selected subsequently for SNOM. SNOM was successful in eight cases. Both patients who failed SNOM had arterial phase contrast extravasation evident on their initial CT. Angioembolisation was not employed in either case. All major complications and the only death occurred in the operatively managed group. No significant complications of SNOM were identified and there were no transfusions in the non-operated group. Those undergoing operative management had longer lengths of stay than those undergoing SNOM (median stay 6.5 vs 3.0 days, p<0.05).

Conclusions

SNOM is a safe strategy for patients with penetrating liver injuries in a UK setting. Patient selection is critical and CT is a vital triage tool. Arterial phase contrast extravasation may predict failure of SNOM and adjunctive angioembolisation should be considered for this group.     

Adrenal gunshot wound: Laparoscopic approach. Report of a case

INTRODUCTION

Although there is no debate that patients with peritonitis or hemodynamic instability should undergo urgent laparotomy after penetrating abdominal injury, it is also clear that certain stable patients may be managed without operation. Controversy persists regarding use of laparoscopy.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

We report a case of gunshot wounds with bullet in left adrenal gland and perirenal subcapsular hematoma. The patients had no signs of peritonitis but in the observation period we noted a significative blood loss, so we performed an exploratory laparoscopy.

DISCUSSION

We found the bullet in adrenal parenchyma. The postoperative period was regular and the patient was discharged without any local or general complication.

CONCLUSION

Although the data are still controversial, the importance of the laparoscopic approach is rapidly increasing also in case of penetrating trauma of the abdomen. This technique assumes both a diagnostic and therapeutic role by reducing the number of negative laparotomies.     

Local wound exploration remains a valuable triage tool for the evaluation of anterior abdominal stab wounds

Background

Recent guidelines do not support local wound exploration (LWE) or diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL) in the evaluation of patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds (AASWs), favoring computed tomography scanning or serial examinations. In patients without immediate indications for laparotomy, we hypothesized that LWE/DPL would identify patients requiring surgery while limiting unnecessary hospital admissions.

Methods

Patients sustaining penetrating trauma at our level I trauma center over a 3-year period were reviewed.

Results

During the study period, 139 patients with AASW followed our LWE/DPL algorithm. Fifty-six patients had LWE without fascial penetration: 46 were discharged immediately, 10 required admission. Fifty-eight patients had fascial penetration on LWE but negative DPL: 37 were observed for less than 24 hours, 19 were observed for more than 24 hours, and 2 patients developed peritonitis requiring exploration. Twenty-five patients had positive LWE/DPL: 13 had therapeutic laparotomy, 12 had nontherapeutic laparotomy.

Conclusions

Only 11% of patients with AASWs without overt indication for laparotomy require surgical care. LWE remains a valid method to exclude intra-abdominal injury and to eliminate hospitalization in more than one third of AASW patients.     

Laparoscopy and thoracoscopy in penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries

Summary BACKGROUND: Cavitary endoscopy, to incorporate laproscopy and thoracoscopy, has a great potential in the management of trauma both for diagnosis and treatment and has the potential to expand its horizons, fostered by innovations in imaging, computerization, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence. METHODS: Indications for cavitary endoscopy were developed with consideration of the relevant literature and the authors own experience. The surgical technique for penetrating injuries, which depends on the particular indication, is described. RESULTS: Cavitary endoscopy is a safe and efficient means of determining the depth of penetrating injuries and can make up for the diagnostic deficits of imaging techniques. Therapeutic measures such as diaphragmatic sutures can also be applied safely. CONCLUSIONS: The trauma surgeon should utilize it ably and efficiently for the benefit of the patient but without increasing iatrogenic complications.