Evaluation of ultrasound,lavage, and computed tomography in blunt abdominal trauma

Summary We have analysed the data of 136 patients with multiple injuries treated between 1983 and 1988 in order to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of ultrasound, lavage and computed tomography (CT) for the preoperative diagnosis of blunt abdominal trauma. CT was carried out in doubtful cases (n=29) if ultrasound and lavage had not provided sufficient information. Fifty-eight patients were primarily excluded from the study because neither clinical examination nor ultrasound gave any sign of an intra-abdominal lesion. In 25 cases, sonography could be compared with lavage, CT, and the intraoperative situs. Ultrasound showed reliable results in respect to accuracy (100%), sensitivity (84%), and specificity (98%). Computed tomography confirmed all sonographic diagnoses in 29 patients but did not provide further information. Peritoneal lavage gave correct information in all patients operated upon. Our 5-years' experience suggests that ultrasound is a reliable, quick, cheap, and repeatable technique of great value in patients with blunt abdominal traumata.Presented at the International Congress on Surgical Endoscopy, Ultrasound, and Interventional Techniques, Berlin 1988     

Evaluation of computed tomography and diagnostic peritoneal lavage in blunt abdominal trauma

Three hundred one hemodynamically stable patients with equivocal abdominal examinations following blunt abdominal trauma had a CT scan followed by DPL. Both studies were negative in 194 patients (71.6%) and positive in 51 patients (27.1%). Seven of the 51 patients (13.7%) had an additional significant injury at operation that was not seen on the CT scan. Nineteen patients had a negative CT scan, a positive DPL, and a significant injury confirmed at celiotomy. In this group of 19 patients, the CT failed to identify seven splenic, three hepatic, and three small bowel injuries. There were two complications attributed to DPL. Three patients had a false negative DPL. Diagnostic peritoneal lavage continues to be a reliable study (sensitivity--95.9%, specificity--99%, accuracy--98.2%). The CT scan is not as sensitive (sensitivity--74.3%, p less than 0.001; specificity--99.5%, accuracy--92.6%). It is concluded that selective use of both procedures is appropriate as long as one recognizes the inherent limitations of each.     

Diagnostic peritoneal lavage in blunt abdominal trauma.

Diagnostic peritoneal lavage is accurate and safe. It leads to fewer unnecessary laparotomies than if clinical examination alone is used and nearly eliminates deaths from undiagnosed abdominal injuries. Persons with clinical abdominal findings, shock, altered sensorium, and severe chest injuries after blunt trauma should undergo the procedure.     

Diagnostic peritoneal lavage in blunt abdominal trauma.

A prospective study to determine the reliability of diagnostic peritoneal lavage in blunt abdominal trauma was carried on during the 11 year period January 1978 to February 1989. Abdominal injury was correctly diagnosed by peritoneal lavage in 1,275 of 1,305 patients (97.7%). In the present study the charts of these patients were reviewed. Of the 555 patients in whom peritoneal lavage was positive and who underwent laparotomy, only 396 patients had an intraabdominal injury that required operation according to our new criteria for the treatment of blunt abdominal trauma. Sixty of the 555 patients had minor injuries that were treated conservatively. The remainder had either little (n = 78) or no (n = 21) intra-abdominal damage except a small amount of free blood about 20 ml in the peritoneal cavity. Diagnostic peritoneal lavage is accurate (97.7%) in detecting free blood in the abdominal cavity. On the other hand, it results in a high percentage of unnecessary laparotomies (28.6%). Patients with blunt abdominal trauma in whom peritoneal lavage shows the presence of blood should be investigated further to reduce the number of unnecessary laparotomies.     

诊断性腹腔灌洗及CT和B超对钝性腹部创伤诊断的比较

目的 比较诊断性腹腔灌洗（DPL），CT和B超对钝性腹部创伤诊断的准确性。方法 前瞻性分析61例血流动力学稳定的钝性腹部创伤病例，病人入院后首先行B超和CT检查，之后再完成DPL。如3项检查中有1项阳性则剖腹探查，并将手术发现与检查结果作比较。结果 DPL，CT，B超对钝性腹部创伤诊断的敏感性，特异性，准确性分别为97．4％，81．7％，91．8％，97．3％，91．3％，95．1％及92．3％，90．9％，91．5％。3项检查对钝性腹部创伤诊断的准确性相似，但B超与DPL和CT相比具有迅速，方便，重复性好，可在床旁进行等优点。结论 在对钝性腹部创伤的诊断中B超可以取代DPL，CT可作为补充诊断手段。     

Diagnostic peritoneal lavage in blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma.

Peritoneal lavage as a diagnostic aid is described in a small series which includes both blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma. Its value for blunt injuries has been confirmed, and it is recommended for penetrating injuries, when the diagnosis of visceral injury is in doubt.     

Peritoneal lavage enzyme determinations following blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma.

Diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL) provides a rapid and sensitive means of investigating the peritoneal cavity following blunt and penetrating trauma. However, its shortcomings include insensitivity in the early identification of isolated hollow viscus injuries. We have routinely assayed lavage amylase (LAM) and alkaline phosphatase (LAP) in acutely injured patients for more than 4 years to assess the contribution of lavage enzyme analysis to the overall accuracy of DPL. From 1,969 DPLs, LAM was analyzed in 1,881 (96%) and LAP in 1,734 (88%) of 1,536 blunt and 433 penetrating trauma cases. Of 28 patients with negative lavage by LRBC but LAM greater than or equal to 20 IU/L, 13 (46%) had clinically significant injury requiring laparotomy. Seventy-seven percent of these cases involved the small bowel. In this group, LAM greater than or equal to 20 IU/L had a sensitivity of 87%, specificity of 75%, and positive predictive value of 46% for significant intra-abdominal injury. Seven patients had LAM greater than or equal to 20 IU/L and LAP greater than or equal to 3 IU/L. These values had a sensitivity of 54%, specificity of 98%, and positive predictive value of 88% for significant abdominal injury. Elevations of LAM (greater than or equal to 20 IU/L) and LAP (greater than or equal to 3 IU/L) mandate laparotomy where the history is consistent with possible small bowel injury. Elevation of either enzyme alone should raise the suspicion of hollow visceral organ injury and warrant close observation.     

Peritoneal lavage after abdominal trauma: indications, technique, results

This study represents our experience with 1461 patients who were seen in the Emergency Room of the University Hospital in Ghent with multiple traumatic lesions, between 1978 and 1982. In 43% of these polytraumata, we did an explorative peritoneal lavage in order to obtain a quick evaluation of intrabdominal haemorrhage. In 65% of the patients, the lavage was negative; 221 positive lavages (35%) underwent abdominal exploration; in 85% of these there were evident positive findings. The remaining 15% showed either no lesions, or minor lesions not involving risk of life. The overall accuracy-rate of the technique described above is at least 93%.     

Complementary roles of diagnostic peritoneal lavage and computed tomography in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma.

OBJECTIVE: To assess in randomized prospective format sensitivity, laparotomy rate, and cost-effectiveness of using diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL) in a complementary role with computed tomography (CT) in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma. METHODS: Blunt trauma patients greater than 18 years of age were eligible for entry in the study. The study period was from February 1999 to July 2000 at an urban Level I trauma center. All patients were hemodynamically stable upon study entry and had abdominal tenderness with Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores > 13 or GCS < 14. Patients were randomized to a DPL arm (DPL-CT) versus a CT arm. If randomized to the CT arm, patients underwent abdominal/pelvis CT. If CT was positive for solid organ injury, patients were observed. If free fluid was identified on CT without solid organ injury, patients were explored. If randomized to DPL-CT, patients underwent closed infraumbilical DPL, except pelvic fractures that were done with the open supraumbilical technique. If the DPL result was > 20,000 RBCs/mm3, patients underwent abdominal/pelvis CT. If the CT following DPL was consistent with solid organ injury, patients were observed. If the CT following DPL identified free fluid without solid organ injury and DPL was > 100,000 RBCs/mm3, patients were explored. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-two patients were entered; 127 patients were randomized to DPL-CT and 125 to CT. Of the 125 patients randomized to CT, 102 (82%) CT scans were negative, 19 (15%) were positive for solid organ injury, and 3 (2%) had free fluid. Three (2%) of the initial negative CT scan patients underwent delayed laparotomy for missed injuries. Of the 127 patients randomized to DPL-CT, 26 (20%) required CT scan, of which 13 (10%) were positive for solid organ injury and 13 (10%) for free fluid. Positive DPL results that were indications for CT ranged from 21,000 to 1 million RBCs/mm3. Eight of the 13 DPL-CT patients with free fluid on CT had DPL results less than 100,000 RBCs/mm3 and did not require laparotomy. There were no known missed injuries in the DPL-CT arm. Seven (6%) laparotomies were performed in the DPL-CT arm and 10 (8%) in the CT arm. The average cost to the patient for abdominal evaluation in the CT arm was 1611 dollars and 650 dollars in the DPL-CT arm. CONCLUSION: Screening DPL with complementary CT has a low nontherapeutic laparotomy rate and is a sensitive and cost-effective method for the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma.     

Abdominal computed tomography scan in pediatric blunt abdominal trauma.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of abdominal CT scans in pediatric patients and correlate the findings with the clinical examination. A 2-year retrospective review of 88 patients with an abdominal CT scan after blunt trauma was performed. Seventy-two patients were identified with complete clinical examination data available. In its ability to predict the need for surgery, the CT scan had a sensitivity of 67 per cent and a negative predictive value of 98.7 per cent. The combination of the clinical examination and the CT scan findings did not miss any significant injuries. No patient with a soft, nontender abdomen and a negative CT scan required an abdominal operation. We conclude that the CT scan alone may miss clinically significant injuries. In blunt abdominal trauma in the pediatric population, the CT scan findings should be coupled with the clinical examination to ensure that no significant abdominal injuries are missed.     

The complementary roles of diagnostic peritoneal lavage and computed tomography in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma

To determine the roles of diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL) and abdominal computed tomography (CT) in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma, we compared our results in the eras before and after the advent of abdominal CT. In the pre-CT era 1977 to 1980 (group 1; 365 patients), DPL was the diagnostic procedure of choice. In the CT era 1983 to 1986 (group 2; 282 patients), DPL was used for unstable, polytraumatized patients, and CT was reserved for stable patients. The rate of delayed recognition of documented visceral injury (7%) was similar for groups 1 and 2. Celiotomy was nontherapeutic in 21 (14%) patients in group 1 and in 5 (5%) in group 2 (p less than 0.02). Despite immediate availability of abdominal CT, clinical examination alone or in combination with DPL was the diagnostic procedure of choice in 41% of those with blunt abdominal trauma in group 2. The complementary use of abdominal CT and DPL in those with blunt abdominal trauma decreased the rate of nontherapeutic celiotomy, did not result in a significant increase in missed injuries, and allowed identification of candidates for nonoperative management of solid organ injury.     

Evaluation of a diagnostic protocol using screening diagnostic peritoneal lavage with selective use of abdominal computed tomography in blunt abdominal trauma.

BACKGROUND: The optimal method of evaluating blunt abdominal trauma remains controversial. A combination of a sensitive screening test, diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL), and a specific test, abdominal computed tomography (CT), may be a safe, efficient approach to adult blunt abdominal trauma. METHODS: A prospective cohort study compared a protocol using screening DPL followed by selective use of abdominal CT (DPL/abdominal CT) and the use of abdominal CT alone in the evaluation of hemodynamically stable, adult blunt trauma patients. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-seven adult blunt trauma patients were initially evaluated by DPL (n = 71) or abdominal CT (n = 96). Emergency department evaluation required less time in the DPL/abdominal CT group than in the abdominal CT alone group (41 minutes vs. 2.5 hours; p < 0.001). There were no missed injuries in the DPL/abdominal CT group versus seven missed injuries in the abdominal CT group (p = 0.02). There were no nontherapeutic celiotomies in either study group. CONCLUSION: Screening DPL, followed by abdominal CT if positive, is a safe, efficient method of evaluating adult blunt abdominal trauma that reduces the time required to evaluate the abdomen, does not result in increased nontherapeutic celiotomies, results in fewer missed injuries, and reduces the overall use of abdominal CT.     

Peritoneal lavage in pediatric patients sustaining blunt abdominal trauma: a reappraisal

One hundred twenty-eight patients from 0 to 18 years of age underwent diagnostic peritoneal lavage following blunt abdominal trauma. Seventy-eight had negative lavages and 50 were positive. Forty-one patients underwent exploratory celiotomy after positive lavage results. A review of the operative findings and need for surgical intervention led to the conclusion that 12 of these operations were not necessary. Due to the oversensitivity of peritoneal lavage a strongly positive result mandates further diagnostic evaluation unless the patient's clinical status requires exploratory celiotomy.