超声与CT检查对闭合性腹部实质性脏器损伤的诊断价值

目的对闭合性腹部实质性脏器损伤患者进行超声与CT检查,对其临床诊断价值进行分析。方法选取2008年1月至2017年10月医院收治的闭合性腹部损伤患者51例,对其分别进行超声与CT检查,通过将其与手术结果进行比较,对两种影像学检查的诊断价值进行分析。结果 51例闭合性腹部损伤患者中,其中43例为实质性脏器损伤,超声诊断38例为实质性脏器损伤,诊断符合率为88.4%,CT诊断39例为实质性脏器损伤,诊断符合率为90.7%,两种诊断符合率比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05);但在检查平均使用时间、平均费用方面,超声检查明显低于CT检查,比较差异均具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论对闭合性腹部实质性脏器损伤患者进行超声检查具有快速、经济,且诊断率高等优势,是一种非常有效的方式,值得临床进一步应用推广。     

腹部闭合性损伤的研究进展

<正>腹部损伤可分为开放性和闭合性两大类,腹部闭合性损伤是指腹部受到外界某种原因(如机械性打击、钝挫、挤压等)所造成的腹腔内脏器官的损伤。闭合性损伤常因坠落、碰撞、冲击、挤压、击打等钝性暴力所致。在腹部闭合性损伤中常见受损内脏依次是脾、肾、小肠、肝、肠系膜等~([1])。闭合性腹部损伤包括腹腔内实质性脏器损伤和空腹脏器损伤。实质性脏器损伤主要表现为出血,腹膜炎体征一般不     

超声对腹部闭合性损伤的诊断价值

为客观评价超声对诊断腹部闭合性损伤的实用价值，本文回顾150例超声与手术资料，进行对照和分析。结果显示，超声对腹腔积血征的检出敏感，诊断实质性脏器损伤符合率高，达95．2％，但对损伤脏器定位诊断正确率偏低。并分析了其客观和主观原因。认为超声在闭合性腹部损伤的诊断和评价方面是首选诊断工具，有较重要的应用价值。     

颅脑损伤合并闭合性腹部损伤40例分析

目的 探讨颅脑损伤合并闭合性腹部损伤早期诊断和治疗特点，旨在合理治疗，改善预后。方法 回顾性分析40例颅脑损伤合并闭合性腹部损伤病例的临床资料。结果 所有病例均经临床表现、影像学诊断及手术所证实，其中行单纯开颅手术15例，开颅加腹部手术12例，单纯行腹部手术13例，治愈32例，死亡8例，病死率为20％。结论 颅脑损伤合并闭合性腹部损伤病情表现复杂，细心查体和观察病情、及早明确诊断、及时明确损伤的主次部位、正确把握手术时机、合理治疗是成功救治的关键。     

闭合性腹部损伤行B超诊断的临床意义探讨

目的：研究探讨B超检查对闭合性腹部损伤中的诊断临床意义。方法回顾性分析2013年1月至2013年12月本院收治的闭合性腹部损伤患者128例,入院就诊后行B超检查,并行手术治疗,根据手术结果对照分析B超检查闭合性腹部损伤准确率。结果经过B超检查和手术结果对比观察所示,128例闭合性腹部损伤患者中经手术证明腹部实质性脏器损伤患者93例（占72.66％）,B超诊断准确率为91.40％,经手术证明腹部非实质性脏器损伤患者35例（占27.34%）,B超诊断准确率为74.29％,B超检查腹部闭合性实质器官损伤准确率优于非实质性器官准确率。结论 B超检查诊断闭合性腹部损伤有较高的准确率,可为临床进一步准确治疗提供重要的依据,因此是闭合性腹部损伤诊断的首选方法,适合临床广泛应用。     

闭合性小肠破裂的诊断与治疗：（附76例报告）

闭合性小肠破裂的诊断与治疗（附７６例报告）浙江省瑞安市人民医院外科陈积贤，陈永康小肠所占腹部面积最大，无论是腹部钝挫伤或开放伤，小肠损伤的发病率均占空肠脏器伤的第一位［１］。我院自１９８４年２月以来共收治闭合性腹部损伤２６４例，伴小肠破裂７６例占２８...     

多层螺旋CT对腹部脏器损伤的诊断作用研究

目的研究分析CT检查闭合性腹部损伤的应用价值。方法选取2018年11月至2020年6月本院收治的腹部创伤患者共120例,所有患者在入院后均行CT及超声检查,并最终行手术治疗。结果 120例患者通过手术治疗共发现128处脏器损伤,实质脏器损伤81处,空腔脏器损伤47处。CT检查对实质器官和空腔脏器的定位诊断率均明显高于超声检查(P0.05);CT检查肝脏损伤、胃损伤、结肠损伤、空肠损伤、回肠损伤及膀胱损伤的诊断率明显高于超声检查,CT检查对腹部损伤的诊断率优于超声检查(P0.05)。结论对于闭合性腹腔损伤患者,在条件允许的情况下应首先选择行常规CT检查或增强扫描,诊断效果较好,利于临床医师在早期及时制定治疗方案。     

急诊床旁超声在腹部损伤中的应用价值

目的 了解急诊床旁超声在腹部闭合性损伤中的应用价值.方法 回顾性分析67例腹部闭合性创伤超声影像资料.结果 所有患者行急诊床旁超声检查,诊断符合率分别为:肝损伤92%,脾损伤93%,肾损伤80%,胰腺损伤50%,空腔脏器损伤67%,肠系膜血管损伤100%,腹膜后血肿100%.结论 急诊床旁超声是诊断腹部创伤致内脏破裂出...     

婴幼儿腹部闭合性损伤的诊断及治疗

目的: 探讨婴幼儿腹部闭合性损伤的诊断与治疗。方法:对婴幼儿腹部闭合性损伤84例患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果:腹部闭合性实质脏器损伤60例（肝损伤32例， 脾损伤28例），小肠穿孔10例，腹壁软组织挫伤14例。非手术治疗肝损伤27例，脾损伤22例。手术治疗肝损伤5例，脾损伤6例;其他类型损伤手术10例。84例患儿均治愈出院。结论:婴幼儿闭合性腹部损伤诊治过程中，应用合理腹穿，B超，CT检查迅速明确有无内脏损伤及程度;严格掌握手术治疗适应证;实质脏器损伤非手术治疗安全可行，治愈率高。     

腹部闭合性损伤138例超声检查体会

目的探讨超声检查在腹部闭合性损伤诊断中的应用体会。方法应用超声诊断仪对全腹内脏进行多切面的重点扫查。结果本组超声检查总符合率达88.4%,对实质性脏器损伤能做出直接诊断,对空腔脏器损伤可以提供间接征象。结论超声检查对腹部闭合性损伤诊断独特的价值,对临床治疗方案的选择有重要意义。     

Laparoscopy as diagnostic-therapeutic method in abdominal traumatism in the pediatric age

The management of blunt abdominal traumatism with a moderate amount of free peritoneal fluid and without solid organ injury as well as the one of minimal penetrating trauma is controversial. We present three cases of blunt abdominal trauma and two of penetrating trauma that underwent diagnostic laparoscopy in our department. We found a small bowel perforation in one of the cases of blunt trauma that was repaired by externalization of the jejuna loop by one of the ports. In the other two cases we found intestinal and mesenteric contusions and free fluid that were treated by peritoneal drainage. One of the cases of penetrating trauma presented omentum evisceration with no other injuries and the second presented a gastric perforation that needed reconversion to laparotomy. In our experience and according to literature, laparoscopy should be taken into account as a diagnostic procedure and sometimes also therapeutic in selected cases of both blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma in pediatric population.     

Endovascular management of blunt abdominal aortic injury

The endovascular management of blunt aortic injuries is being used more frequently in the trauma patient. Traumatic aortic injuries usually occur in the descending thoracic aorta near the origin of the left subclavian artery. Many reports in the literature demonstrate the efficacy of endovascular repair of blunt thoracic aortic injury. We report here an unusual case of abdominal aortic dissection secondary to blunt abdominal trauma following a fall. The patient also had associated intra-abdominal injuries requiring bowel resection and repair of small bowel mesenteric lacerations. He was treated with a bifurcated abdominal endograft with an excellent result after the initial operation was performed to treat the bowel injuries.     

Intestinal injury mechanisms after blunt abdominal impact.

Intestinal injury is frequent after non-penetrating abdominal trauma, particularly after modern, high-energy transfer impacts. Under these circumstances, delay in the diagnosis of perforation is a major contributor to morbidity and mortality. This study establishes patterns of intestinal injury after blunt trauma by non-penetrating projectiles and examines relationships between injury distribution and abdominal wall motion. Projectile impacts of variable momentum were produced in 31 anaesthetised pigs to cause abdominal wall motion of varying magnitude and velocity. No small bowel injury was observed at initial impact velocity of less than 40 m/s despite gross abdominal compression. At higher velocity, injury to the small bowel was frequent, irrespective of the degree of abdominal compression (P = 0.00044). Large bowel injury was observed at all impact velocities and at all degrees of abdominal compression. This study confirms the potential for intestinal injury in high velocity, low momentum impacts which do not greatly compress the abdominal cavity and demonstrates apparent differences in injury mechanisms for the small bowel and colon. Familiarity with injury mechanisms may reduce delays in the diagnosis of intestinal perforation in both military and civilian situations.     

Blunt gastric injuries

Gastric rupture after blunt abdominal trauma is a rare injury with few reports in the literature. The purpose of this study was to review our experience with blunt gastric injuries and compare outcomes with small bowel or colon injuries. All patients with hollow viscus perforations after blunt abdominal trauma from 1992 to 2005 at our level I trauma center were reviewed. Of 35,033 blunt trauma admissions, there were 268 (0.7%) patients with a total of 319 perforating hollow viscus injuries, 25 (0.07%) of which were blunt gastric injuries. When compared with the small bowel or colon injuries, the blunt gastric injury group had a higher Injury Severity Score (22 versus 17, P = 0.04), more patients with a chest Abbreviated Injury Score greater than 2 (36% versus 12%, P < 0.01), and a shorter interval from injury to laparotomy (221 versus 366 minutes, P = 0.017). Multivariate analysis identified five independent risk factors for mortality: age older than 55 years, head Abbreviated Injury Score greater than 2, chest Abbreviated Injury Score greater than 2, the presence of hypotension on admission, and Glasgow Coma Scale 8 or less. The results of this study suggest that mortality in patients with blunt hollow viscus injuries can be attributed to concurrent head and chest injuries, but not the specific hollow viscus organ that is injured.     

An unusual bile duct injury in a child after blunt abdominal trauma.

Bile duct injuries are rare in children after blunt trauma. This report describes a 3-year-old child who sustained a blunt abdominal trauma resulting in bile duct, liver, and small bowel injuries. The initial management at another hospital included recognition and repair of a small bowel perforation. However, the postoperative course was complicated by a large biliary leak. The child was transferred to our institution where radioisotope scanning and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography confirmed the extent of the ductal injury. At laparotomy there were injuries of both right and left hepatic ducts, and an anomaly of bile duct course was noted. The right hepatic duct was repaired primarily and the left one was repaired with Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy. Postoperatively, normal bile drainage was documented by radioisotope scan and the patient remains symptom free at 1 year follow-up.     

Free fluid on abdominal computed tomography without solid organ injury after blunt abdominal injury does not mandate celiotomy

BACKGROUND: Mandatory celiotomy has been proposed for all patients with unexplained free fluid on abdominal computed tomography (CT) scanning after blunt abdominal injury. This recommendation has been based upon retrospective data and concerns over the potential morbidity from the late diagnosis of blunt intestinal injury. This study examined the rate of intestinal injury in patients with free fluid on abdominal CT after blunt abdominal trauma. METHODS: This study was a multicenter prospective series of all patients with blunt abdominal trauma admitted to four level I trauma centers over 22 months. Data were collected concurrently at the time of patient enrollment and included demographics, injury severity score, findings on CT scan, and presence or absence of blunt intestinal injury. This database was specifically queried for those patients who had free fluid without solid organ injury. RESULTS: In all, 2,299 patients were evaluated. Free fluid was present in 265. Of these, 90 patients had isolated free fluid with only 7 having a blunt intestinal injury. Conversely, 91% of patients with free fluid did not. All patients with free fluid were observed for a mean of 8 days (95% confidence interval 6.1 to 10.4, range 1 to 131). There were no missed injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Free fluid on abdominal CT scan does not mandate celiotomy. Serial observation with the possible use of other adjunctive tests is recommended.     

Stenosis of the small bowel after blunt abdominal trauma.

At the Catholic University of Louvain, between 1950 and 1990, two patients were treated for blunt abdominal trauma resulting in stenosis of the small bowel. One patient underwent partial resection of the small bowel 6 weeks after the trauma was sustained. The other was admitted for surgery 26 years after a blunt abdominal trauma. Surprisingly, the stenosis of the small bowel was accompanied by a ureteral obstruction due to fibrosis and terminal hydronephrosis.     

Incidence of hollow viscus injury in blunt trauma: an analysis from 275,557 trauma admissions from the East multi-institutional trial

BACKGROUND: Blunt hollow viscus injury (HVI) is uncommon. No sufficiently large series has studied the prevalence of these injuries in blunt trauma patients. This study defines the prevalence of blunt HVI, in addition to the associated morbidity and mortality rates for this diagnosis on the basis of a series of over 275,000 trauma admissions. METHODS: Patients with blunt small bowel injury (SBI) were identified from the registries of 95 trauma centers for a 2-year period (1998-1999). Each HVI patient (case) was matched by age and Injury Severity Score with a blunt trauma patient receiving an abdominal workup who did not have HVI (control). Patient level data were abstracted by individual chart review. Institution level data were collected on total numbers for trauma admission demographics and on total diagnostic examinations performed. RESULTS: From 275,557 trauma admissions, 227,972 blunt injury patients were identified. HVI was rare, with 2,632 patients identified from this group. Perforating small bowel injury accounted for less than 0.3% of blunt admissions. Mortality and morbidity were high for HVI. Controlling for injury severity, patients with HVI were usually at higher risk of death than non-HVI patients. CONCLUSION: HVI is a rare but deadly phenomenon. The high mortality rates reflect the severity of the HVI and associated injuries. HVI patients should be carefully monitored for related injuries and complications.     

Perforations of the small intestine in closed injuries of the abdomen. Apropos of 63 cases

The records of 63 patients with small bowel perforation after blunt abdominal trauma admitted to the Department of Surgical Pathology, University Hospital of Coimbra, from 1965 to 1981, have been reviewed to establish patterns of injury and to discuss their pathogenesis and operative management. The authors believe that injuries to the small intestine following blunt abdominal trauma are more common than is generally appreciated. Proper treatment is frequently delayed because these injuries are not recognized promptly. Factors contributing to this delay are the trivial nature of some of the responsible accidents and the often negative results of diagnostic aids.     

Isolated free fluid on computed tomographic scan in blunt abdominal trauma: a systematic review of incidence and management

BACKGROUND: Abdominal computed tomographic (CT) scan is accepted as the primary diagnostic modality in stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma. A recent survey of 328 trauma surgeons demonstrated marked variation in the management of patients with head injuries and the finding of free intra-abdominal fluid without solid organ injury on CT scan. This study was undertaken to attempt to determine what to do when free fluid without solid organ injury is seen on abdominal CT scan in patients with blunt trauma. METHODS: Articles concerning the incidence and significance of free intra-abdominal fluid on CT scan of blunt trauma patients without solid organ injury were systematically reviewed. A MEDLINE search was performed using terms such as tomography-x-ray computed, wounds-nonpenetrating, small intestine/injuries, time factors, and abdominal trauma and diagnostic tests. Bibliographies of pertinent articles were reviewed. Appropriate articles were evaluated for quality and data were combined to reach a conclusion. RESULTS: Meta-analysis could not be performed because no randomized, prospective, controlled trials could be found. Forty-one articles were excluded from the analysis because they looked at only patients with known injuries to intestine, diaphragm, or pancreas and the investigation of the CT scan findings did not include negative scans. Ten articles, which described CT scan results for all patients presenting with blunt abdominal trauma for a defined period of time, formed the basis of this study. Isolated free fluid was seen in 463 (2.8%) of over 16,000 blunt trauma patients scanned. A therapeutic laparotomy was performed in only 122 (27%) of these patients. CONCLUSION: The isolated finding of free intra-abdominal fluid on CT scan in patients with blunt trauma and no solid organ injury does not warrant laparotomy. Alert patients may be followed with physical examination. Patients with altered mental status should undergo diagnostic peritoneal lavage.