Laparoscopy in blunt abdominal trauma

Summary BACKGROUND: The decision in favor of surgery or nonoperative conservative treatment in abdominal trauma requires a precise diagnosis that is not always possible with imaging techniques. As there is particular danger that an injury to the diaphragm or intestines be overlooked, the indications for exploratory laparotomy should be generous. Owing to this circumstance, however, up to 41% of exploratory laparotomies turn out to be nontherapeutic and could be, or could have been, avoided with laparoscopy. METHODS: A diagnostic laparoscopy with therapeutic option in blunt abdominal trauma should only be attempted in stable patients. Usually three trocars are used and the exploration of the abdomen is systematic, beginning with the right upper quadrant and continuing clockwise. Small lacerations of the intestines and mesentery can be detected and sutured endoscopically, as well as injuries to the diaphragm. Injuries to parenchymal organs are not a primary indication for laparoscopy, but they can be sealed with tissue adhesive and collagen tamponade to prevent further bleeding. RESULTS: Routine use of laparoscopy can achieve a sensitivity of 90–100% in abdominal trauma. This can reduce the number of unnecessary laparotomies and the related morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy can be performed safely and effectively in stable patients with abdominal trauma. The most important advantages are reduction of morbidity, shortening of hospitalization and cost-effectiveness. In the future, new developments in laparoscopy equipment and the introduction of computer technology and robotic devices can be expected to have a decisive influence on the treatment of trauma patients.     

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.     

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。     

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.     

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     

A multi faceted quality improvement programme results in improved outcomes for the selective non-operative management of penetrating abdominal trauma in a developing world trauma centre

Introduction

The selective non-operative management (SNOM) of penetrating abdominal trauma (PAT) is well established in our environment. As a quality-improvement initiative, we aimed to re-evaluate patient outcomes with PAT. This follows the application of new imaging and diagnostic modalities using protocolised management algorithms.

Methodology

A prospectively maintained digital registry was retrospectively interrogated and all patients with PAT treated by our service from January 2012 to March 2013 were included in this study.

Results

A total of 325 patients sustained PAT during the fourteen-month study period. This included 238 SWs, 80 GSWs and 7 impalement injuries. 11 patients had eviscerated bowel, and 12 had eviscerated omentum. A total of 123 patients (38%) were selected for a trial of SNOM. This included 103 SWs, 15 GSWs and 5 impalement injuries. Emergency laparotomy was performed on 182 patients (115 SWs, 65 GSWs and 2 impalement injuries) and 21 patients with left sided thoraco-abdominal SWs underwent definitive diagnostic laparoscopy (DL). SNOM was successful in 122 cases (99%) and unsuccessful in one case (1%). In the laparotomy group 161 (88%) patients underwent a therapeutic procedure, in 12 cases (7%) the laparotomy was non-therapeutic and in 9 cases (5%) the laparotomy was negative. In the laparoscopy group (24), two patients required conversion for colonic injuries and one for equipment failure. Seven (33.3%) laparoscopies were therapeutic with the identification and intra-corporeal repair of seven left hemi-diaphragm injuries.

Conclusion

We have improved our results with the SNOM of PAT and have also managed to safely and successfully extend the role of SNOM to abdominal GSWs. We have selectively adopted newer modalities such as laparoscopy to assess stable patients with left thoraco-abdominal SWs and abdominal CT scan for the SNOM of abdominal GSWs.     

Laparoscopy versus laparotomy in management of abdominal trauma

Background A majority of abdominal injuries (AIs) are associated with shock, hence most of the patients are hemodynamically unstable, which limits the use of video-assisted laparoscopy (VAL) in their management. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the possibility of using VAL in management of stable and unstable patients with abdominal trauma. Methods In a period of six years 2,695 patients with AIs were evaluated. The subjects were evaluated retrospectively and divided into two groups. Group 1, consisting of 1,363 patients, had conventional routine investigations following which they underwent laparotomy for confirmatory diagnosis and definitive management. The second group, consisting of 1,332 patients, underwent diagnostic laparoscopy in addition to the conventional investigations in the first group; 411 patients of this group had therapeutic laparoscopy. Demographic information, incidence of organs injuries and operative findings, success rate of VAL and laparotomy repair, complications, associated injuries, and hospital mortality were evaluated. Results The age of 62.6% of our patients was 20–50 years, while 10.6% and 14.5% were less than 19 and greater than 50 years, respectively. Associated injuries were head, chest, musculoskeletal, and vertebral column. Most of the victims presented with shock; 50.7%, 24.7%, and 15.9% of the patients were in mild, moderate, and severe shock respectively, and 8.7% of the subjects had stable hemodynamic status. In the first group 47.1% of the laparotomies were absolutely indicated and 24.4% were negative. Of the patients who had laparotomy, 26.0% would have been managed confidently by VAL. In the second group following VAL 42.5% of the patients did not require surgical intervention. VAL surgery was performed in 30.8% of patients. Conversion to laparotomy was performed in 26.7% of the patients. Conclusions The VAL technique can be confidently used as a main tool to expedite evaluation and treatment of patients with abdominal trauma in cases of both stable and unstable hemodynamic status.     

Mini-laparoscopy in blunt abdominal trauma

Summary Blunt abdominal trauma in multiorgan injured or comatose patients always presents a problem. The aim is to assess, in the shortest period of time, which organ injury requires priority and whether intra-abdominal bleeding or perforation exists. Abdominal lavage proved to be too sensitive. Not every positive case needs exploration. Approximately 15%–20% of the cases explored because of positive lavage did not show a significant bleeding site that would require surgical treatment. The authors developed a mini-laparoscope that can be used at the bedside, in the emergency room, or in the intensive care unit. The procedure can be performed with intravenous sedation and local anesthesia. In 150 cases, no hemoperitoneum was found in 53% of these cases. Except for 1 (see text for details), none of these patients needed further exploration. In 21%, severe hemoperitoneum was discovered; these patients were transferred to the operating room, and this was confirmed by surgery. In 26%, a small amount of blood was found in the gutters. These patients were observed in the intensive care unit and an unnecessary exploration was avoided. Laparoscopy gives a wider range of decision making by observing the abdominal cavity. It can be completed in 10–20 min at the bedside. No serious complications were encountered. This procedure should be taught and practiced in trauma centers. Partially based on a presentation to the International Congress on Surgical Endoscopy, Ultrasound, and Interventional Techniques, Berlin 1988     

腹腔镜手术在闭合性腹外伤中的应用

目的 探讨腹腔镜手术在闭合性腹外伤中的价值。方法 2003年12月～2006年7月腹腔镜诊治47例闭合性腹外伤。在全麻或硬膜外麻醉下,脐下做1 cm小切口,根据病人的具体情况选用气腹针或通过开放性通道建立人工气腹。未明确诊断者可适当置1～2个trocar配合探查;若明确诊断,根据病灶位置选择操作孔位置,一般2～3个。根据病变情况再做相应处理。结果 47例经腹腔镜手术明确诊断：肝破裂15例,脾破裂13例,小肠破裂9例,肠系膜损伤3例,胰腺损伤2例,腹膜后血肿2例,腹内多脏器损伤3例。腹腔镜下完成手术28例,17例中转开腹,2例诊断为腹膜后血肿无须处理。47例随访6个月无并发症发生。结论 腹腔镜下可明确诊断闭合性腹外伤,使患者得到及时、有效、合理的治疗。     

The utility of focused abdominal ultrasound in blunt abdominal trauma: a reappraisal

BACKGROUND: Focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) has become commonplace in the management of blunt abdominal trauma. However, newer computed tomography (CT) scanners have decreased imaging time for trauma patients and provide more detailed examination of abdominal contents. It was the aim of the current study to evaluate practice patterns of FAST and abdominal CT in blunt trauma victims. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of all blunt trauma patients (N = 299) who received at least 1 FAST examination in the emergency department by surgeons and were admitted. Patients were tracked for subsequent CT scanning, disposition from the emergency department, any operative findings, and survival. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 299 patients (7%) had a positive FAST. There were 7 deaths and 14 patients were taken directly to the operating room (OR) for control of abdominal bleeding. Thirty-one of 299 (10%) had equivocal FAST. There were 4 deaths and 8 patients were taken to the OR for control of abdominal bleeding. A total of 247 of the 299 patients had a negative FAST. CT scans were performed in 193: 15 showed a visceral injury. There were 13 deaths and 29 patients were taken to the OR (4 for bleeding). Patients with a positive FAST had a higher mortality than FAST-negative patients (P < .001) and greater likelihood for operation (P < .001). Those with equivocal FAST had a greater likelihood for operation than FAST-negative patients (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: FAST examinations can identify patients at risk for hemorrhage and in whom operation may be needed and, therefore, can guide mobilization of hospital resources. FAST-negative patients can be managed expectantly, using more specific imaging techniques.     

腹腔镜在腹部闭合性损伤中的应用

目的探讨腹腔镜在腹部闭合性损伤中的应用. 方法 2000年7月～2003年12月我院对21例血流动力学稳定的腹部闭合性损伤急诊行腹腔镜探查及治疗. 结果 21例均在腹腔镜下明确诊断.开腹肝修补术4例,腹腔镜肝修补术2例,开腹脾切除术5例,手助腹腔镜脾切除术3例,腹腔镜辅助下小切口小肠修补术2例,小肠部分切除术4例,腹腔镜大网膜血管缝扎止血1例. 结论腹腔镜诊治腹部闭合性外伤准确、安全、有效.     

Laparoscopy for Penetrating Thoracoabdominal Trauma: Pitfalls and Promises

Background:

How should the stable patient with penetrating abdominal or lower chest trauma be evaluated? Evolving trends have recently included the use of diagnostic laparoscopy. In September 1995 we instituted a protocol of diagnostic laparoscopy to identify those patients who could safely avoid surgical intervention.

Design:

Prospective case series.

Materials and Methods:

Hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating injuries to the anterior abdomen and lower chest were prospectively evaluated by diagnostic laparoscopy, performed in the operating room under general anesthesia, and considered negative if no peritoneal violation or an isolated nonbleeding liver injury had occurred. If peritoneal violation, major organ injury or hematoma was noted, conversion to open celiotomy was undertaken.

Results:

Seventy consecutive patients were evaluated over a two-year period. The average length of stay (LOS) following negative laparoscopy was 1.5 days, and for negative celiotomy 5.2 days. There were no missed intra-abdominal injuries following 30 negative laparoscopies, and 26 of 40 laparotomies were therapeutic. The technique also proved useful in evaluation of selected blunt and HIV+ trauma vic-tims with unclear clinical presentations. However, while laparoscopy was accurate in assessing the abdomen following penetrating lower chest injuries, significant thoracic injuries were missed in 2 out of 11 patients who required subsequent return to OR for thoracotomy.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopy has become a useful and accu-rate diagnostic tool in the evaluation of abdominal trauma. Nevertheless, laparoscopy still carries a 20% nontheraputic laparotomy rate. Additionally, significant intrathoracic injuries may be missed when laparoscopy is used as the pri-mary technique to evaluate penetrating lower thoracic trauma.     

Postoperative CD4 counts predict anastomotic leaks in patients with penetrating abdominal trauma

Introduction

The influence of trauma- and surgical stress-induced decrease of CD4 count on anastomotic leaks after penetrating abdominal trauma has to date not been investigated. A prospective study was performed to explore the effect of CD4 count 24?h after surgery on the anastomotic leak rate and to identify risk factors for anastomotic leaks.

Duration of antibiotic prophylaxis in high-risk patients with penetrating abdominal trauma: A prospective randomized trial

To evaluate the effect of varying durations of antibiotic prophylaxis in trauma patients with multiple risk factors for postoperative septic complications, a prospective randomized trial was undertaken at an urban level I trauma center. The inclusion criteria were full-thickness colon injury and one of the following: (1) Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Index ≥25, (2) transfusion of 6 units or more of packed red blood cells, or (3) more than 4 hours from injury to operation. Patients were randomly assigned to a short course (24 hours) or a long course (5 days) of antibiotic therapy. All patients received 2 g cefoxitin en route to the operating room and 2 g intravenously piggyback every 6 hours for a total of 1 day vs. 5 days. Sixty-three patients were equally divided into short-course (n = 31) and long-course (n = 32) therapy. This was a high-risk patient population, as assessed by the mean Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Index (33), number of patients with multiple blood transfusions (51 of 63; 81%), number of patients with an Injury Severity Score greater than 15 (37 of 63; 59%), number of patients with destructive colon wounds requiring resection (27 of 63; 43%), and number of patients requiring postoperative critical care (37 of 63; 59%). Differences in intra-abdominal (1-day, 19%; 5-days, 38%) and extra-abdominal (1-day, 45%; 5-days, 25%) infection rates did not achieve statistical significance. There continues to be no evidence that extending antibiotic prophylaxis beyond 24 hours is of benefit, even among the highest risk patients with penetrating abdominal trauma. A large, multi-institutional trial will be necessary to condemn this common practice with statistical validity.     

"Awake" laparoscopy for the evaluation of equivocal penetrating abdominal wounds

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic laparoscopy is useful for the assessment of equivocal penetrating abdominal wounds, and has become the modality of choice for the evaluation of such wounds at our institution. We hypothesised that, in appropriate patients, diagnostic "awake" laparoscopy (AL) could be performed under local anaesthesia in the emergency department (ED), allowing for expedited discharge and potential cost savings. METHODS: Selected haemodynamically stable patients with penetrating abdominal injury underwent AL. Suitability for AL was at the discretion of the attending surgeon. Identification of peritoneal penetration by AL led to exploratory laparotomy in the operating room. Patients with no evidence of peritoneal penetration were discharged from the ED (ALneg). These patients were matched to a cohort of 24 patients who underwent diagnostic laparoscopy in the OR which was negative for peritoneal penetration (DLneg). Length of stay and hospital charges were compared. RESULTS: Over a 30-month period, 15 patients underwent AL without complication. No peritoneal penetration was found in 11 patients. The remaining four patients underwent exploratory laparotomy, of which two were positive for intra-abdominal injury. Mean time to discharge was 7h in the ALneg group versus 18 h in the DLneg group (p=0.0003). Cost savings on hospital charges averaged 2227 US dollars per patient in the ALneg group compared with the DLneg group. CONCLUSIONS: AL may be safely performed in the ED, allowing for expedited patient discharge. Cost savings are achieved by the avoidance of charges inherent to diagnostic laparoscopy performed in the operating room.     

Management of a pneumopericardium due to penetrating trauma

Introduction

A pneumopericardium presenting after penetrating chest trauma is a rare event. The surgical management of this clinical problem has not been clearly defined. The aim of this study was to document the mode of presentation and to suggest a protocol for management.

Patient and methods

A review of a prospectively collected cardiac database of patients presenting to Groote Schuur Hospital Trauma Centre between October 2001 and February 2009 with a pneumopericardium on chest X-ray after penetrating trauma.

Results

There were 27 patients with a pneumopericardium (mean age 25 years, range 17–36). The mechanism of injury was a stab wound to the chest in 26 patients and a single patient with multiple low velocity gunshot wounds. Six patients (22%) were unstable and required emergency surgery. One of these patients presented with a tension pneumopericardium. Twenty-one patients were initially stable. Two of these (10%) patients later developed a tension pneumopericardium within 24-h and were taken to theatre. The remaining 19 patients were managed with a subxiphoid pericardial window (SPW) at between 24 and 48 h post admission. Ten of these 19 patients (52%) were positive for a haemopericardium. Only 4 of the 19 underwent a sternotomy and only two of these had cardiac injuries that had sealed. There were no deaths in this series.

Conclusion

Patients with a penetrating chest injury with a pneumopericardium who are unstable require emergency surgery. A delayed tension pneumopericardium developed in 10% of patients who were initially stable. It is our recommendation that all stable patients with a pneumopericardium after penetrating chest trauma should undergo a SPW. A sternotomy is not required in stable patients.