Nonoperative management of abdominal solid-organ injuries following blunt trauma in adults: Results from an International Consensus Conference

Nonoperative management of solid abdominal organ injuries: From past to present

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Today, a significant proportion of solid abdominal organ injuries, whether caused by penetrating or blunt trauma, are managed nonoperatively. However, the controversy over operative versus nonoperative management started more than a hundred years ago. The aim of this review is to highlight some of the key past observations and summarize the current knowledge and guidelines in the management of solid abdominal organ injuries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A non-systematic search through historical articles and references on the management practices of abdominal injuries was conducted utilizing early printed volumes of major surgical and medical journals from the late 19th century onwards.

RESULTS

Until the late 19th century, the standard treatment of penetrating abdominal injuries was nonoperative. The first article advocating formal laparotomy for abdominal gunshot wounds was published in 1881 by Sims. After World War I, the policy of mandatory laparotomy became standard practice for penetrating abdominal trauma. During the latter half of the 20th century, the concept of selective nonoperative management, initially for anterior abdominal stab wounds and later also gunshot wounds, was adopted by major trauma centers in South Africa, the United States, and little later in Europe. In blunt solid abdominal organ injuries, the evolution from surgery to nonoperative management in hemodynamically stable patients aided by the development of modern imaging techniques was rapid from 1980s onwards.

CONCLUSION

With the help of modern imaging techniques and adjunctive radiological and endoscopic interventions, a major shift from mandatory to selective surgical approach to solid abdominal organ injuries has occurred during the last 30-50 years.

Clinical outcomes of primary arterial embolization in severe hepatic trauma: A systematic review

PURPOSE

This purpose of this systematic review was to determine the safety and efficacy of arterial embolization as the primary treatment for grade III-V liver trauma, excluding the postoperative use of arterial embolization.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 24 studies published between January 2000 and June 2018 qualified for inclusion in this study. Four of them were prospective studies and 20 were retrospective. A total of 3855 patients (mean age, 33.5 years; range: 22-52.5 years) were treated non-operatively and 659 patients (659/3855; 17.09%) with hepatic hemorrhage underwent primary arterial embolization from 2000 to 2017. Indication for arterial embolization was a contrast blush visible on computed tomography in hemodynamically stable patient in all studies.

RESULTS

The arterial embolization success rate ranged from 80% to 97%. The most commonly reported complication was bile leak, with an incidence of 5.7%. Nineteen bilomas (2.8%) were reported in five studies with a range between 4% and 45%. Hepatic ischemia was reported in eight studies, with a mean incidence of 8.6%.

CONCLUSION

Primary arterial embolization has a high success rate in patients with hepatic trauma. Complications, including biloma and hepatic ischemia, have acceptable rates in the context of a minimally-invasive procedure that allows stabilization of life-threatening, complex liver injuries.

Current strategy for hollow viscus injury with active bleeding: A case report

Despite rapid advancements in medical technologies, the use of interventional radiology in a patient with hemodynamic instability or hollow viscus injury remains controversial. Here, we discuss important aspects regarding the use of interventional radiology for such patients. A 74-year-old Japanese male climber was injured following a 10 m fall. On admission, his systolic blood pressure was 40 mmHg. He had disturbance of consciousness and mild upper abdominal pain without peritoneal irritation. Focused assessment sonography for trauma indicated massive hemorrhage in the intra-abdominal cavity. Plain radiographs revealed hemopneumothorax with right-side rib fractures. Thoracostomy to the right thoracic cavity and massive transfusion were immediately performed. Consequently, a sheath catheter was inserted into the common femoral artery for interventional radiology. His systolic blood pressure increased to 80 mmHg owing to rapid transfusion. In the computed tomography scan room, based on computed tomography findings, we judged that it was possible to achieve hemostasis by interventional radiology. The time from hospital admission to entering the angiography suite was 38 min. Transcatheter arterial embolization for hemorrhage control was performed without complications. Following transcatheter arterial embolization, he was admitted to the intensive care unit. All injuries could be treated conservatively without surgery. His post-interventional course was uneventful, and he recovered completely after rehabilitation. Hemorrhage control using interventional radiology should be assessed as a first-line treatment, even in hemodynamically unstable patients having a hollow viscus injury with active bleeding, without obvious findings that indicate surgical repair.

Clinical update on management of pancreatic trauma

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic injury is rare and optimal diagnosis and management is still debated. The aim of this study was to review the existing data and consensus on management of pancreatic trauma.

METHODS

Systematic literature review until May 2018.

RESULTS

Pancreas injury is reported in 0.2-0.3% of all trauma patients. Severity is scored by the organ injury scale (OIS), with new scores including physiology needing validation. Diagnosis is difficult, clinical signs subtle, and imaging by ultrasound (US) and computed tomography (CT) non-specific with <60% sensitivity for pancreatic duct injury. MRCP and ERCP have superior sensitivity (90-100%) for detecting ductal disruption. Early ERCP with stent is a feasible approach for initial management of all branch-duct and most main-duct injuries. Distal pancreatectomy (±splenectomy) may be required for a transected gland distal to the major vessels. Early peripancreatic fluid collections are common in ductal injuries and one-fifth may develop pseudocysts, of which two-thirds can be managed conservatively. Non-operative management has a high success rate (50-75%), even in high-grade injuries, but associated with morbidity. Mortality is related to associated injuries.

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic injuries are rare and can often be managed non-operatively, supported by percutaneous drainage and ductal stenting. Distal pancreatectomy is the most common operative procedure.