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.     

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.     

Transdiaphragmatic pleural lavage in penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of thoracic sepsis following a systematic thoracic cavity washout through the injured diaphragm in patients with penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma. METHODS: Prospectively collected data on all patients presenting with penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma between July 1999 and July 2002 were analysed. Patients with peritoneal biliary-gastroenteric (BGE) contamination and a diaphragmatic laceration were managed by laparotomy and transdiaphragmatic thoracic lavage. RESULTS: A total of 217 patients had penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries, of whom 110 had BGE contamination of the peritoneal cavity with spillage into the pleural cavity. The mean Injury Severity Score was 38.1. Gunshot and stab wounds occurred in 79 (71.8 per cent) and 31 (28.2 per cent) respectively. Contamination was from the stomach (55.4 per cent), large bowel (37.3 per cent), small bowel (29.1 per cent), gallbladder and bile ducts (9.1 per cent) and pancreas (6.4 per cent). Thoracic complications occurred in six patients (5.5 per cent): empyema in two, Escherichia coli-related pneumonia in three and pleuritis in one. There were no deaths. CONCLUSION: A thoracic washout through the injured diaphragm in patients with penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma and BGE contamination was associated with a low rate of intrathoracic septic complications.     

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.     

Laparoscopic evaluation of penetrating thoracoabdominal traumatic injuries

Background

General surgeons’ recent familiarity with advanced laparoscopic techniques have rendered laparoscopy feasible safely in the trauma setting. Traditionally high rates of nontherapeutic laparotomies also contribute to this increased interest. This study was undertaken to determine the predictive value and accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) in evaluation of penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma.

Methods

Entry criteria included thoracoabdominal gunshot (GSW) or stab wounds (SW) in otherwise hemodynamically stable patients. A high index of suspicion for either hemoperitoneum, peritonitis, or diaphragmatic injury was required for inclusion. All patients underwent DL in the operating room followed by standard laparotomy. The findings of the two evaluations were compared.

Results

Twenty-four patients were included in the study. Twenty males and 4 females with an average age of 34 years made up the group. Violation of the peritoneal cavity was present in 21 cases and absent in 3. No intraabdominal injuries were found during laparotomy in the latter three cases without peritoneal violation. The specificity and positive predictive value were 100% for lesions of the diaphragm, liver, spleen, pancreas, kidney, and hollow viscus. The sensitivity was highest for liver and spleen injuries (88%), followed by diaphragmatic injuries (83%), pancreas and kidney injuries (50%), and lowest for injuries of hollow viscus (25%). The negative predictive value was 95, 99, 91, and 57%, respectively, for these organs.

Conclusions

DL could have avoided unnecessary laparotomy in 38% of cases in this study. There were no complications related to laparoscopy. The greatest value of DL in penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries is in the evaluation of peritoneal violation, diaphragmatic, and upper abdominal solid-organ injuries. It is not ideal for predicting hollow viscus injuries.     

Laparoscopy in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma

Laparoscopic diagnostics provides fast, reliable, clear, and obvious information on extent and depth of abdominal organs injury with minimizing additional trauma to the patient. It is performed without any specific preparations and, if needed, it may be promptly converted into conventional laparotomy. Through use of optical equipment with various refraction angles and through variable patient positioning, laparoscopic technique enables visualization of whole abdominal cavity. In approximately 20% of cases of unclear findings, and after other performed diagnostic procedures, laparoscopy provides definitive diagnosis. Abdominal surgeons are familiar with this method, making interpretaion of the results very fast and reliable and, what is the most important, this method avoids additional trauma caused by conventional laparotomy.     

Laparoscopy in the evaluation of the intrathoracic abdomen after penetrating injury.

Penetrating trauma to the intrathoracic abdomen is a difficult clinical problem, especially with reference to the detection of diaphragmatic injuries. A retrospective analysis of 657 laparotomies for penetrating abdominal trauma at our institution revealed 78 laparotomies with negative results. The majority (44.8%) were for wounds in the lower chest and upper abdomen. The role of laparoscopy in evaluating these difficult areas was studied in 40 (34 stab wounds and 6 gunshot injuries) patients. Fifteen stab wounds and five gunshot wounds were nonpenetrating. Laparoscopy revealed eight clinically unsuspected diaphragmatic lacerations in seven patients. Twenty patients had hemoperitoneum. Five patients with omental bleeding and abdominal wall bleeding and four with nonbleeding liver lacerations underwent nontherapeutic laparotomies. One patient with a nonbleeding liver laceration was observed successfully without laparotomy. Ten of the 20 patients with hemoperitoneum had therapeutic laparotomies. The incidence of diaphragmatic lesions discovered by laparoscopy in this series was comparable with that reported after a mandatory laparotomy for thoracoabdominal wounds. It is concluded that laparoscopy is an excellent modality for the evaluation of the intrathoracic abdomen and the diaphragm.     

Delayed evaluation of combat-related penetrating neck trauma

OBJECTIVE: The approach to penetrating trauma of the head and neck has undergone significant evolution and offers unique challenges during wartime. Military munitions produce complex injury patterns that challenge conventional diagnosis and management. Mass casualties may not allow for routine exploration of all stable cervical blast injuries. The objective of this study was to review the delayed evaluation of combat-related penetrating neck trauma in patients after evacuation to the United States. METHOD: From February 2003 through April 2005, a series of patients with military-associated penetrating cervical trauma were evacuated to a single institution, prospectively entered into a database, and retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Suspected vascular injury from penetrating neck trauma occurred in 63 patients. Injuries were to zone II in 33%, zone III in 33%, and zone I in 11%. The remaining injuries involved multiple zones, including the lower face or posterior neck. Explosive devices wounded 50 patients (79%), 13 (21%) had high-velocity gunshot wounds, and 19 (30%) had associated intracranial or cervical spine injury. Of the 39 patients (62%) who underwent emergent neck exploration in Iraq or Afghanistan, 21 had 24 injuries requiring ligation (18), vein interposition or primary repair (4), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) graft interposition (1), or patch angioplasty (1). Injuries occurred to the carotid, vertebral, or innominate arteries, or the jugular vein. After evacuation to the United States, all patients underwent radiologic evaluation of the head and neck vasculature. Computed tomography angiography was performed in 45 patients (71%), including six zone II injuries without prior exploration. Forty (63%) underwent diagnostic arteriography that detected pseudoaneurysms (5) or occlusions (8) of the carotid and vertebral arteries. No occult venous injuries were noted. Delayed evaluation resulted in the detection of 12 additional occult injuries and one graft thrombosis in 11 patients. Management included observation (5), vein or PTFE graft repair (3), coil embolization (2), or ligation (1). CONCLUSIONS: Penetrating multiple fragment injury to the head and neck is common during wartime. Computed tomography angiography is useful in the delayed evaluation of stable patients, but retained fragments produce suboptimal imaging in the zone of injury. Arteriography remains the imaging study of choice to evaluate for cervical vascular trauma, and its use should be liberalized for combat injuries. Stable injuries may not require immediate neck exploration; however, the high prevalence of occult injuries discovered in this review underscores the need for a complete re-evaluation upon return to the United States.     

Laparoscopy is sufficient to exclude occult diaphragm injury after penetrating abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND: Occult diaphragm injury after penetrating thoracoabdominal injury can be difficult to diagnose and can remain occult for months to years. Delayed diagnosis is associated with the risk of hernia formation, strangulation, and high morbidity and mortality. Although laparoscopy has been proposed as a means of evaluating the diaphragm in these patients, prior studies did not include a confirmatory procedure or did not report long-term follow-up. Thus, true sensitivity and specificity remain unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of laparoscopy for the detection of diaphragm injury after penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma. We hypothesized that laparoscopy alone is sufficient to exclude diaphragm injury after penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma. METHODS: We conducted a prospective case series of 34 hemodynamically normal asymptomatic patients with thoracoabdominal penetrating injuries. All patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy to evaluate the diaphragm for the presence of injury. All patients then underwent confirmatory celiotomy (n = 30) or video-assisted thoracoscopy (n = 4). RESULTS: All patients were men between the ages of 18 and 54 years. There were 37 stab wounds and 1 gunshot wound. The mean lowest preoperative systolic blood pressure recorded was 120 +/- 18 mm Hg. Penetrating injuries were stratified by anatomic location (anterior, 18; posterior, 8; flank, 9; not specified, 3). There were 7 true-positive, 30 true-negative, no false-positive, and 1 false-negative result. Specificity, sensitivity, and negative predictive value were 100%, 87.5%, and 96.8%, respectively. The single missed injury occurred in a patient with hemoperitoneum from associated splenic injury that obscured the diaphragm and warranted celiotomy. CONCLUSION: In asymptomatic hemodynamically normal patients with penetrating thoracoabdominal injury, laparoscopy alone is sufficient to exclude diaphragmatic injury.     

Video-assisted thoracoscopy in the evaluation of penetrating thoracic trauma.

The management of patients who present with penetrating thoracic trauma but are haemodynamically stable may be subjective and imprecise. We report our initial experience with the use of video-assisted thoracoscopy in a series of five patients in whom accurate assessment was achieved and unnecessary thoracotomy avoided.     

Laparoscopy in penetrating wounds of the abdomen]

Within the recent 5 years, the authors observed 103 sufferers with penetrating injury to the abdomen. Operated on were 79 patients. Of them, 39 underwent explorative laparotomy. Laparoscopy was performed in obscure diagnosis in sufferers with associated trauma who were unconscious, in those with the signs of alcohol intoxication, in drug addicts etc. The advantages of the use of laparoscopy in the diagnosis, and in some patients--in the treatment of injuries were noted.