Laparoscopy in penetrating abdominal trauma is a safe and effective alternative to laparotomy

Role of laparoscopic surgery in blunt abdominal trauma; retrospective analysis in a tertiary trauma center

PURPOSE

Trauma is a significant health concern globally and is one of the leading causes of illness and death. The laparoscopic approach has gained popularity in trauma care since its inception, becoming increasingly favored for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. This study aims to reduce unnecessary laparotomies and assess the effectiveness of laparoscopy in managing patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

The study is a descriptive retrospective study using the medical records of patients with blunt abdominal trauma who were managed with laparoscopy in the Department of General Surgery, King Abdulaziz Medical City in Riyadh. The study period was from 2019 to 2023 and included patients > 18 years with abdominal blunt injury, hemodynamically stable patients, and responding to resuscitation. The relationship between laparoscopic procedures according to the patient's demographic and characteristics was conducted using the Fischer Exact test and independent sample t-test. Values were considered significant with a p-value of less than 0.05.

RESULTS

In this study, 74 patients were included, with 94.6% being males. The average age of the patients was 36.3 years (standard deviation of 12.5 years). The primary cause of trauma was motor vehicle accidents (MVAs), accounting for 91.9% of cases. The most common surgical approach used was laparotomy, performed in 71.6% of patients. Additionally, CT scans revealed that solid organ injuries were the most frequently detected type of injury, occurring in 41.9% of cases. Following surgery, 78.4% of the patients underwent therapeutic procedures after laparotomy, while 37.8% received therapeutic interventions post-laparoscopy.

CONCLUSION

While laparoscopic techniques have been used for decades in abdominal surgeries, a consensus on their effectiveness and accuracy in diagnosing blunt abdominal injuries in trauma settings is still lacking. Laparoscopy is considered safe and feasible for hemodynamically stable patients, and our findings suggest it is equally effective in trauma cases for those who can tolerate the procedure. We recommend conducting further studies with larger sample sizes and more variables to provide sufficient data to accurately assess the efficacy and safety of laparoscopy in trauma situations.

Role of laparoscopic surgery in managing hemodynamically stable abdominal trauma patients: a single level I trauma center, propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopy in the treatment and diagnosis of penetrating thoraco-abdominal injury has been established. However, there is no clear consensus on the role of laparoscopy in blunt injury due to numerous reasons, such as concerns of missed injury and technical problems in treating various abdominal organs. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of laparoscopy and evaluate its safety in managing blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma.

METHODS

The medical records and Korean Trauma Data Base (KTDB) of patients who underwent abdominal surgery from January 2018 to December 2022 at a single level I center were collected. Patients were classified into a laparoscopy group and a laparotomy group. The laparoscopy groups were matched 1:1 with the laparotomy group by using propensity score matching (PSM). Patient demographics, injured organ and its grade, operative procedure, and postoperative outcomes were evaluated and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 128 patients were included. There was no significant imbalance in demographics between the two groups except sex. Injured organ and its grade showed no significant differences between the two groups except for the incidence of omentum. Small bowel and mesenteric repair were performed most often in both groups. Splenectomy, pancreatic surgery, duodenectomy, and liver resection were performed exclusively in the laparotomy group. Severe postoperative complication rate (3% vs. 20%: p = 0.004), length of stay in ICU (3.3 ± 3.2 days vs. 4.6 ± 3.7; p = 0.046), and operation time (93.9 ± 47.7 min vs. 112.8 ± 57.7; p = 0.046) were significantly lower in the laparoscopy group. The conversion rate was about 16%. There was no missed injury.

CONCLUSIONS

In hemodynamically stable abdominal trauma patients who sustained penetrating or blunt injury, laparoscopy is feasible and safe as a diagnostic and therapeutic modality in selected cohort of abdominal trauma.

Trauma Laparoscopy: Time Efficient, Cost Effective, and Safe

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopy has demonstrated improved outcomes in abdominal surgery; however, its use in trauma has been less compelling. In this study, we hypothesize that laparoscopy may be observed to have lower costs and complications with similar operative times compared to open exploration in appropriately selected patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed adult patients undergoing abdominal exploration after blunt and penetrating trauma at our level 1 center from 2008 to 2020. Data included mechanism, operative time, length of stay (LOS), hospital charges, and complications. Patients were grouped as follows: therapeutic and nontherapeutic diagnostic laparoscopy and celiotomy. Therapeutic procedures included suture repair of hollow viscus organs or diaphragm, evacuation of hematoma, and hemorrhage control of solid organ or mesenteric injury. Unstable patients, repair of major vascular injuries or resection of an organ or bowel were excluded.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-six patients were included with comparable demographics. Diagnostic laparoscopy had shorter operative times, LOS, and lower hospital charges compared to diagnostic celiotomy controls. Similarly, therapeutic laparoscopy had shorter LOS and lower hospital costs compared to therapeutic celiotomy. The operative time was not statistically different in this comparison. Patients in the celiotomy groups had more postoperative complications. The differences in operative time, LOS and hospital charges were not statistically significant in the diagnostic laparoscopy compared to diagnostic laparoscopy converted to diagnostic celiotomy group, nor in the therapeutic laparoscopy compared to the diagnostic laparoscopy converted to therapeutic laparoscopy group.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy can be used safely in penetrating and blunt abdominal trauma. In this cohort, laparoscopy was observed to have shorter operative times and LOS with lower hospital charges and fewer complications.

The Role of Minimally Invasive Surgeries in Trauma

This article delves into the role of minimally invasive surgeries in trauma, specifically laparoscopy and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). It discusses the benefits of laparoscopy over traditional laparotomy, including its accuracy in detecting peritoneal violation and intraperitoneal injuries caused by penetrating trauma. The article also explores the use of laparoscopy as an adjunct to nonoperative management of abdominal injuries and in cases of blunt trauma with unclear abdominal injuries. Furthermore, it highlights the benefits of VATS in diagnosing and treating thoracic injuries, such as traumatic diaphragmatic injuries, retained hematomas, and persistent pneumothorax.

Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma.

METHODS

This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement.

RESULTS

A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

Role of laparoscopy in management of patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds

BACKGROUND

In this retrospective cohort study, we assessed the utility of laparoscopic surgery for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes in patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds (AASWs). We also investigated patient characteristics that might suggest a greater suitability of laparoscopic interventions.

METHODS

Over a 25-year span, we analyzed AASW patients who had operations, categorizing them based on the presence of significant intra-abdominal injuries and whether they received laparoscopic surgery or laparotomy. We compared variables such as preoperative conditions, surgical details, and postoperative outcomes. We further evaluated the criteria indicating the necessity of direct laparotomies and traits linked to overlooked injuries in laparoscopic surgeries.

RESULTS

Of 142 AASWs surgical patients, laparoscopic surgery was conducted on 89 (62.7%) patients. Only 2 (2.2%) had overlooked injuries after the procedure. Among patients without significant injuries, those receiving laparoscopic surgery had less blood loss than those receiving laparotomy (30.0 vs. 150.0 ml, p = 0.004). Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery also had shorter hospital stays (significant injuries: 6.0 vs. 11.0 days, p < 0.001; no significant injuries: 5.0 vs. 6.5 days, p = 0.014). Surgical complications and overlooked injury rates were comparable between both surgical methods. Bowel evisceration correlated with higher laparotomy odds (odds ratio = 16.224, p < 0.001), while omental evisceration did not (p = 0.107).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy is a safe and effective method for patients with AASWs, fulfilling both diagnostic and therapeutic needs. For stable AASW patients, laparoscopy could be the preferred method, reducing superfluous nontherapeutic laparotomies.

Contrast-enhanced computed tomography abdomen versus diagnostic laparoscopy-based management in patients with penetrating abdominal trauma: a randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

Penetrating abdominal trauma was traditionally managed by mandatory exploration, which led to high rates of non-therapeutic surgery and prolonged hospital stay. Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) is a less-invasive alternative; however, it requires general anaesthesia and carries a potential risk of iatrogenic injuries. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT)-guided selective non-operative management (SNOM) may avoid surgery altogether, but there is apprehension of missed injury. Randomised trials comparing these two modalities are lacking. This study is aimed at comparing outcomes of these two management approaches.

METHODS

Hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating trauma to anterior abdominal wall were randomised in 1:1 ratio to DL or CECT-based management. Primary outcome was length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were rate of non-therapeutic surgery, complications, and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay.

RESULTS

There were 52 patients in DL group and 54 patients in CECT group. Mean LOS was comparable (3 vs 3.5 days; p = 0.423). Rate of non-therapeutic surgery was significantly lower in CECT group (65.4 vs 17.4%, p = 0.0001). Rate of complications and length of ICU stay were similar. Selective non-operative management based on CECT findings was successful in 93.8% of patients; 2 patients had delayed surgery.

CONCLUSION

In patients with penetrating trauma to anterior abdominal wall, DL and CECT-based management led to comparable hospital stay. Significant reduction in non-therapeutic surgery could be achieved using a CECT-based approach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trials registry-India (CTRI/2019/04/018721, REF/2019/01/023400).

SELECTIVE NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT OF PENETRATING ABDOMINAL STAB WOUNDS: RETROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY

Introduction: in modern conditions, the number of patients with penetrating abdominal wounds remains high. At present, in urgent surgical practice, the problem of developing a unified algorithm for the diagnosis and treatment of hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating abdominal stab wounds in order to reduce the number of «unnecessary» laparotomies/laparoscopies remains relevant.

Aim: improving the effectiveness of management of patients with penetrating stab wounds of the abdomen w, the creation and implementation of the Level I trauma centers of the nonoperative algorithm for this category of patients.

Materials and methods: a cohort retrospective study for the period from 2018 to 2021 included hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating stab wounds of the abdomen, who were treated at the N.V. Sklifosovsky, to which various surgical tactics were applied. Over a 3-year period, 96 patients were selected, of which 72.9% were men and 27.1% were women. The mean age was 33.6 ± 6.5 years. 34 (35.4%) patients were treated conservatively, exploratory laparotomy was performed in 22 (22.9%) patients, exploratory laparoscopy was performed in 40 (41.7%) patients. Results: the analysis of the data obtained during the study revealed a significant decrease in the number of intra- and postoperative complications, a decrease in the duration of hospital stay by using selective non operative management in hemodynamically stable patients.

Conclusion: a selective conservatism in hemodynamically stable patients are effective and allow avoiding «unnecessary» surgical interventions, reducing the level of disability and mortality.

Characteristics of Laparoscopic Surgery for Trauma Patients and Risks of Conversion to Open Laparotomy

BACKGROUND

The discussion is ongoing about appropriate indications for laparoscopic surgery in trauma patients. As timing and risks of conversion to laparotomy remain unclear, we aimed to elucidate characteristics of and risks for conversion following laparoscopic surgery, using a nationwide database.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted, using Japanese Trauma Data Bank (2004-2018). We included adult trauma patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery as an initial surgical intervention. Conversion to laparotomy was defined as laparotomy at the initial surgery. Patient demographics, mechanism and severity of injury, injured organs, timing of surgery, and clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without conversion. Risks for conversion were analyzed focusing on indications for laparoscopic surgery, after adjusting patient and institution characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 444 patients eligible for the study, 31 required conversions to laparotomy. The number of laparoscopic surgeries gradually increased over the study period (0.5-4.5% of trauma laparotomy), without changes in conversion rates (5-10%). Patients who underwent conversion had more severe abdominal injuries compared with those who did not (AIS 3 vs 2). While length of hospital stay and in-hospital mortality were comparable, abdominal complications were higher among patients with conversion (12.9 vs. 2.9%), particularly when laparoscopy was performed for peritonitis (OR, 22.08 [5.11-95.39]). A generalized estimating equation model adjusted patient background and identified hemoperitoneum and peritoneal penetration as risks for conversion (OR, 24.07 [7.35-78.75] and 8.26 [1.20- 56.75], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Trauma laparoscopy for hemoperitoneum and peritoneal penetration were associated with higher incidence of conversion to open laparotomy.

Clinical decision making for abdominal stab wounds in high resourced but low volume centres require structured guidelines to be effective

Aim

The management of abdominal stab wounds (SW) has continued to evolve. The use of CT and laparoscopy has been advocated to reduce the rate of laparotomy. This study reviews our experience with SW in a high income, low volume setting.

Methods

A retrospective study was undertaken from 2006 to 2020 at Waikato Hospital, New Zealand. All adult patients age > 16 years that were admitted following trauma were included.

Results

Seventy three cases of SW were included. Thirty two cases had indications for immediate laparotomy (peritonitis in 15, hemodynamic instability in 13, evisceration in 4). Twenty two underwent immediate laparotomy. Overall, 43 had a positive laparotomy. One had a negative laparotomy. Thirty seven cases had a CT. Laparoscopy was performed in 24 cases, with 23 demonstrating peritoneal breach. Subsequently 9 were converted to laparotomy whilst 15 had full laparoscopic exploration.

Conclusion

The relative rarity of abdominal SW in our environment has resulted in a considerable degree of heterogeneity in our approach to this clinical dilemma. The simplified algorithm we have developed will hopefully facilitate clinical decision making in our institution.

Penetrating liver injury caused by a metal fragment from a blast accident in a factory: a case report

Penetrating abdominal injuries are rare in countries that do not allow legal possession of firearms by the public. We report a case of a 27-year-old male patient with a penetrating liver injury caused by metal fragments released in a blast accident. On the day of the accident, there was a metal explosion, and multiple fragments of the metal lodged in the patient's abdomen. The metal fragments were widely distributed over the abdomen and limited to the subcutaneous layer. A computed tomography scan showed that one metal fragment had penetrated near the right upper quadrant. First, we tried exploratory laparoscopy to accurately locate and remove the presumed metal fragment under the liver, on the side of the gallbladder, and near the duodenum. However, we could not find the metal fragment and converted the procedure to open laparotomy. The metal fragment was found to be completely lodged in segment 4, the quadrate lobe to the left of the gallbladder. To remove the fragment, a 2-cm incision was made on the liver surface where the metal fragment was found. The patient's general postoperative condition was satisfactory, with no findings of bile leakage or bleeding. In conclusion, clinicians who do not have experience with these injuries can still provide adequate treatment by selecting a treatment method based on the patient's condition as well as the velocity of trauma. The laparoscopic approach, as a less invasive procedure, may be worthwhile for treating penetrating trauma. Additionally, laparoscopic exploratory laparotomy may be considered in selected cases.

Laparoscopy has better performance than laparotomy in the treatment of stable penetrating abdominal trauma: A retrospective cross-sectional study in a trauma referral hospital in Colombia

Background

Abdominal trauma is one of the leading causes of death. In Colombia, few studies have evaluated the results on related factors and outcomes when comparing laparotomy versus laparoscopy in the management of penetrating abdominal trauma. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopy in the treatment of stable penetrating abdominal trauma in a limited resources environment in a middle-income country.

Methods

Retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted in Bogota, Colombia from January 2018 to October 2020. Patients over 18 years old, hemodynamically stable with penetrating abdominal trauma without other body parts injuries, that underwent laparoscopy and/or laparotomy surgical exploration and treatment were included. Frequencies, percentages, correlations, and odds ratio were calculated.

Results

A total of 52 patients were analyzed (26 laparoscopy vs. 26 laparotomy). Stabbing injuries were more frequent in both groups (76.9%), as well as involvement of the anterior abdomen. None missed enterotomies were reported in the laparoscopy group. Surgical time and bleeding were significantly lower in the laparoscopic approach group (63 vs. 115 min and 65 vs. 992 cc, respectively). The time to oral intake and length of stay in the intensive care unit was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic management group (2 vs. 3 days and 1 vs. 4 days, respectively).

Conclusions

Surgical results found a safe scenario in a limited resources environment for the application of the laparoscopic technique to approach penetrating abdominal trauma in stable patients without missed injuries, low threshold of conversion to open approach, and additionally not presenting a higher percentage of complications compared with the laparotomy group in Colombia. Operative time, oral intake, and length of hospital stay were lower in the fully therapeutic laparoscopy group.

WSES guidelines on blunt and penetrating bowel injury: diagnosis, investigations, and treatment

The aim of this paper was to review the recent literature to create recommendations for the day-to-day diagnosis and surgical management of small bowel and colon injuries. Where knowledge gaps were identified, expert consensus was pursued during the 8th International Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery Annual (September 2021, Edinburgh). This process also aimed to guide future research.

Relationship between the anatomical location and the selective non-operative management of penetrating stab wounds in the abdomen

INTRODUCTION

The relationship between the anatomical location of penetrating abdominal stab wounds (SW) and the rate of selective non-operative management (SNOM) based on that location is scarcely reflected in the specialized literature. Our main objective has been to assess this rate based on the anatomical location, and our results.

METHODS

Retrospective review of a prospective registry of abdominal trauma from April 1993 to June 2020. The two study groups considered were the Operative Management (OM), and the SNOM, including in this one the use of diagnostic laparoscopy. Penetrating SWs in the abdomen were classified according to anatomical location.

RESULTS

We identified 259 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria. SNOM was applied in 31% of the patients with a success rate of 96%, and it was more frequent in the lumbar, flank, and thoraco-abdominal regions; within the anterior abdomen it was more applicable in the RH, followed by the LH and epigastrium, respectively. An unnecessary laparotomy was done in 21% of patients, with the highest number in the epigastrium. Taking into account the unnecessary laparotomies and the rates of successful SNOM, 70.5% of lumbar, 66.5% of epigastric, 62% of flank, and 59% of RH penetrating SW could have been managed without a laparotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

SNOM of penetrating SW in the abdomen has been safer and more applicable in those located in the lumbar, flank, epigastric, and RH regions.

Evaluation of diagnostic laparoscopy for penetrating abdominal injuries: About 131 anterior abdominal stab wound

BACKGROUND

The management of hemodynamically stable patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds (AASW) is debated. Mini-invasive techniques using laparoscopy and non-operative management (NOM) have reduced the rate of nontherapeutic laparotomies after AASW leading to unnecessary morbidity. The aim of this study was to determine with a systematic diagnostic laparoscopy of peritoneal penetration (PP), patients who do not require abdominal exploration in the management of stable patient with an AASW.

METHODS

All patients with AASW were retrospectively recorded from 2006 to 2018. Criteria of inclusion were AASW patients who underwent a systematic diagnostic laparoscopy. Criteria of exclusion were patients with an evisceration, impaling, clinical peritonitis, and hemodynamic instability. If no PP was detected, laparoscopy was terminated. If defects of peritoneum were found, a laparotomy was performed looking for diagnosis and treatment of intra-abdominal injuries.

RESULTS

On 131 AASW patients, 35 underwent immediate emergency laparotomy, 96 underwent diagnostic laparoscopy, 47 were positive (PP) and had an intra-abdominal exploration by laparotomy, 32 (68.1%) had intra-abdominal injuries which required treatment. All patients with an intra-abdominal injury had a positive diagnostic laparoscopy. For the 49 patients with a negative laparoscopy, the mean hospital stay was 1.6 days with ambulatory care for some patients. No patient presented a delayed injury. Non-therapeutic laparotomy rate was 15.6%. For patients who did not have an intra-abdominal injury the morbidity rate was low (3%).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that diagnostic laparoscopy was safe, with a low duration of hospitalization, a possible ambulatory care and had an excellent ability to screen the patients who did not need a abdominal exploration. This management can avoid many unnecessary laparotomies with an acceptable rate of negative laparotomy, without any delayed diagnosis of intra-abdominal injuries and with a low morbidity rate.

Relationship between the anatomical location and the selective non-operative management of penetrating stab wounds in the abdomen

INTRODUCTION

The relationship between the anatomical location of penetrating abdominal stab wounds (SW) and the rate of selective non-operative management (SNOM) based on that location is scarcely reflected in the specialized literature. Our main objective has been to assess this rate based on the anatomical location, and our results.

METHODS

Retrospective review of a prospective registry of abdominal trauma from April 1993 to June 2020. The two study groups considered were the Operative Management (OM), and the SNOM, including in this one the use of diagnostic laparoscopy. Penetrating SWs in the abdomen were classified according to anatomical location.

RESULTS

We identified 259 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria. SNOM was applied in 31% of the patients with a success rate of 96%, and it was more frequent in the lumbar, flank, and thoraco-abdominal regions; within the anterior abdomen it was more applicable in the RUQ, followed by the LUQ and epigastrium, respectively. An unnecessary laparotomy was done in 21% of patients, with the highest number in the epigastrium. Taking into account the unnecessary laparotomies and the rates of successful SNOM, 70,5% of lumbar, el 66,5% of epigastric, 62% of flank, and 59% of RUQ penetrating SWs could have been managed without a laparotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

SNOM of penetrating SWs in the abdomen has been safer and more applicable in those located in the lumbar, flank, epigastric, and RUQ regions.

Laparoscopic Management of Blunt and Penetrating Abdominal Trauma: A Single-Center Experience and Review of the Literature

Introduction: Trauma is a leading cause of death in young patients. The prevalence of blunt and penetrating trauma varies widely across the globe. Similarly, the global experience with laparoscopy in trauma patients also varies. There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that laparoscopy is feasible in trauma patients. We sought to contribute to these data by reporting our experience with laparoscopic management of blunt and penetrating trauma in a Belgian center. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected data on all trauma patients admitted to the Saint-Pierre University Hospital in Brussels, Belgium, over the 4-year period from January 2014 to December 2017. Hospital records for patients subjected to exploratory laparoscopy were retrospectively reviewed, and a descriptive analysis was reported. Results: There were 26 patients at a mean age of 40 years treated with laparoscopic exploration for injuries from blunt trauma (7), stab wounds (14), and gunshot injuries (5). The median interval between the arrival at the emergency unit and diagnostic laparoscopy was 175 minutes (range: 27-1440), and the median duration of operation was 119 minutes (range: 8-300). In all patients who underwent laparoscopy for trauma, there were 27% overall morbidity, no mortality, 11% reoperation rate, 7.4% conversions, and 19% incidence of negative laparoscopy. The median intensive care unit stay was 3 days (range: 0-41), and median total hospital stay was 7 days (range: 2-78). Conclusions: Laparoscopy is a safe, feasible, and effective tool in the surgical armamentarium to treat hemodynamically stable patients with blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma. It allows complete and thorough evaluation of intra-abdominal viscera, reduces the incidence of nontherapeutic operations, and allows therapeutic intervention to repair a variety of injuries. However, it requires appropriate surgeon training and experience with advanced laparoscopic techniques to ensure good outcomes.

Bull horn injuries. A 40-year retrospective study with 572 patients

BACKGROUND

Although bullfighting festivals were traditionally attributed to the cultural idiosyncrasies of the Ibero-American people, they also exist world-wide.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted, reviewing the medical records of patients treated on our service for bull horn injuries between January 1978 and December 2019.

RESULTS

There were 572 admissions due to bull horn injuries. 54 of these patients had multiple injuries. The average annual admission was 13.6 patients. The most frequent injuries were located in the lower extremities, perineum, and abdomen. Forty-seven laparotomies were performed, revealing intra-abdominal visceral impairment on 39 occasions. The most frequently injured organs were the intestine and liver. The most frequent complications were skin devitalisation, infection and post-operative eventration. The recorded mortality was 0.87%.

CONCLUSION

We wish to highlight the importance of injuries caused by bull horns worldwide. These are high-impact injuries with specific intrinsic characteristics that require regulated medical and surgical care.

[Value of laparoscopy in blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma-a systematic review]

BACKGROUND

The range of indications for laparoscopic procedures has been continuously widened in recent years. At the same time, however, the diagnostic and therapeutic role of laparoscopy in the management of blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma remains controversial.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out in PubMed from 2008 to 2019 on the use of laparoscopy in blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma. Studies were analyzed in terms of relevant operative and perioperative event rates (rate of missed injuries, conversion rate, postoperative complication rate). On the basis of this analysis, an algorithm for the use of laparoscopy in abdominal trauma was developed for clinical practice.

RESULTS

A total of 15 full texts with 5869 patients were found. With a rate of 1.4%, laparoscopically missed injuries were very rare for both penetrating and blunt abdominal trauma. Of all trauma laparoscopies 29.3% were converted to open surgery (laparotomy). Among the non-converted laparoscopies 60.5% were therapeutic. Complications occurred after trauma laparoscopy in 8.6% of cases.

CONCLUSION

By means of systematic laparoscopic exploration, missed injuries in abdominal trauma are extremely rare, so that concerns in this respect no longer seem justified. A large proportion of intra-abdominal injuries can be treated using laparoscopy or laparoscopically assisted procedures.

Suprapubic penetrating abdominal trauma - defining peritoneal breach and choices in operative intervention

Penetrating abdominal trauma is an uncommon cause of presentation to emergency departments in Australia and is frequently associated with the clinical need for emergent operative intervention. Advances in imaging modalities, improved laparoscopic techniques and structured approaches to resuscitation in trauma have now allowed potential minimally invasive management of such injuries, avoiding laparotomy and therefore defining peritoneal breach; the major determinant of intra-abdominal organ injury in this setting is critical. We present the case of a self-inflicted stab injury to the suprapubic region in an otherwise healthy man and describe the combination of imaging and operative modalities used to define peritoneal breach in this case which successfully reduced the patient’s morbidity by avoiding non-therapeutic laparotomy.