Selective Nonoperative Management of Abdominal Gunshot Wounds from Heresy to Adoption: A Multicenter Study of the Research Consortium of New England Centers for Trauma (ReCoNECT)

Outcomes of selective non-operative management in adults with abdominal gunshot wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Abdominal gunshot wounds (GSWs), a clinically devastating injury, can result in a variety of severe and lethal complications. Traditionally, exploratory laparotomy is the first-line approach for the management of abdominal GSWs, but it is associated with a considerable amount of unnecessary surgeries. At present, selective non-operative management (SNOM) of abdominal GSWs is becoming an effective and well-recognized approach, but it remains widely disputed since many surgeons are skeptical about the validity of SNOM in clinical practice. This meta-analysis aims to estimate the outcomes of SNOM and immediate laparotomy in patients with GSWs by collecting the currently available evidence.

METHODS

The PubMed , EMBASE , and Cochrane Library databases were searched. A random-effects model was employed. A pooled proportion with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated. Heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics.

RESULTS

Overall, 53 studies involving 60 291 participants were included. The pooled proportions of SNOM and SNOM failure were 27.0% (95% CI=24.0-30.0%) and 10.0% (95% CI=7.0-13.0%), respectively. The pooled mortality after SNOM and SNOM failure were 0.0% (95% CI=0.0-1.0%) and 0.0% (95% CI=0.0-0.0%), respectively. The pooled proportions of immediate laparotomy and unnecessary immediate laparotomy were 73.0% (95% CI=70.0-76.0%) and 10.0% (95% CI=8.0-13.0%), respectively. The pooled mortality after immediate laparotomy and unnecessary immediate laparotomy was 10.0% (95% CI=8.0-13.0%) and 0.0% (95% CI=0.0-1.0%), respectively. Heterogeneity was statistically significant in nearly all meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

Immediate laparotomy is still the mainstay approach for the management of abdominal GSWs. Approximately one-third of patients with abdominal GSWs undergo SNOM. SNOM failure is not frequent, and its related mortality is also rare.

Comparative Study between Operative and Conservative Management of Penetrating Anterior Abdominal Stab Injuries

Background: Presently, non-operative management of penetrating abdominal stab injuries has been standardized in several trauma centers. This strategy has appromising outcome conserving decreasing morbidity. Aim of the work: This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of SNOM of patients having penetrating abdominal stab injuries not indicating emergent laparotomy and  to identify a protocol for selection of patient candidates for non-operative management in a tertiary care hospital in Egypt. Patients & Methods: This is a prospective study that involved patients who presented to the casualty department of Kasr Elainy teaching Hospital, in the period from August 2018 to August 2020, for management of a penetrating abdominal Stab injuries. Fully conscious, haemodynimacally stable patients were included. Eligible patients were allocated to either SNOM group or immediate operative management (IOM) group. Results: SNOM group included64 patients and IOM group included 40 patients. The age of the patients ranged from 16 to 49 years with a mean of 33±6.8 years, and the majority were males (99%). SNOM failed in 4/69 patients (5.7%) who required delayed laparotomy for peritonitis (2 cases) and HB drop and haemodynamic instability (2 cases). In IOM group, only 3 cases had therapeutic laparotomies (7.3%). The remaining cases had unnecessary laparotomies (92.7%). Statistically significant higher LOS was seen in SNOM group (p<0.05). However, less unnecessary laparotomies and lower incidences of complications were noted (p<0.01). Conclusion: vital signs together with abdominal examination are the most important clinical criteria in decision making in penetrating abdominal stab injury patients  When surgery is not absolutely indicated, SNOM is a safe and feasible approach in management of penetrating abdominal stab injury by following proper management algorithm and selection criteria.

Selective non-operative management of penetrating abdominal injuries at Northern European trauma centers: the NordiPen Study

PURPOSE

A selective nonoperative management (SNOM) of penetrating abdominal injuries (PAI) is a standard of care in numerous established trauma centers. However, available evidence supporting SNOM of PAI in European settings remains scarce. Thus, we performed a multi-center study at selected Northern European trauma centers to investigate the management and outcomes of PAI. We hypothesized that despite a low number of penetrating injuries in included trauma centers, SNOM is successfully utilized with outcomes comparable with trauma centers with a high number of PAI.

METHODS

All adult patients admitted to participating trauma centers in the Northern European region with PAI between 1/2015 and 12/2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Primary outcomes were mortality and success rate of SNOM.

RESULTS

Overall, 119 patients were included. Median age was 38 (28-47) years. SNOM was initiated in 55 patients (46.0%) with 94.5% success rate. Three patients (5.5%) failed SNOM and had a delayed laparotomy with one gastric injury, one small bowel injury and one patient with a bleeding from mesentery. Overall mortality of the cohort was 5.0%. However, all patients in the SNOM group survived. Higher median ISS, median Abbreviated Injury Scale score of the abdomen, rate of combined anterior and posterior wounds, rate of in-hospital complications and longer hospital length of stay were observed in the immediate laparotomy group compared to the SNOM group.

CONCLUSIONS

SNOM of PAI is a safe practice even in regions with a low prevalence of penetrating injuries. The outcomes in our study are comparable with results from trauma centers treating larger numbers of patients with PAI.

Selective conservative treatment for anterior abdominal gunshot: a literature narrative review

The nonoperative treatment of anterior abdominal gunshot wounds remains controversial. This article presents a narrative review of the literature after the selection of studies in electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library and Lilacs), with the intention of evaluating the clinical and diagnostic tools that should be part of conservative selective approach of these lesions. It was observed that a nonoperative selective treatment can be effectively and safely used, when performed by a trained interdisciplinary team, working in adequate trauma centers. The selective nonoperative treatment is associated with a decrease in negative and nontherapeutic laparotomies, reducing the incidence of complications. It also contributes to the reduction of hospital costs.

The Evolution of Nonoperative Management of Abdominal Gunshot Wounds in the United States

BACKGROUND

Surgical exploration for gunshot wounds to the abdomen has been a surgical standard for the greater part of the past century. Recently, nonoperative management (NOM) has been deemed as a safe option for abdominal gunshot wounds (AGWs). The aim of this analysis was to review the utilization of NOM and mortality after AGWs.

METHODS

We performed a 2010-2014 retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality and Improvement Program. We included all adult (aged 18 and older) patients with AGWs. NOM was defined as nonsurgical intervention within the first 6 h. Outcome measures were trends of utilization of NOM and mortality. Cochrane-Armitage trend analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 808,272 trauma patients were identified, and 16,866 patients with AGWs were included. During the study period, the incidence of AGWs increased, whereas the proportion of bowel injury (P = 0.75) and solid organ injury (P = 0.44) did not change. The NOM rate of AGW increased (2010: 19.5% versus 2014: 27%, P < 0.001). This was accompanied by a decrease in mortality rate (11% versus 9.4%, P = 0.01). Likewise, there was an increase in the use of angiography (7.5% versus 27%, P < 0.001) and laparoscopy (0.9% versus 2.6%, P < 0.001). Overall, 9.8% of the patients had failed NOM. There was no difference in mortality in patients who were managed successfully or failed NOM (5% versus 4.6%, P = 0.45).

CONCLUSIONS

NOM of AGW is more prevalent and is associated with a decrease in mortality rate. Selective NOM may be practiced safely after AGWs.

Outcomes of selective nonoperative management of civilian abdominal gunshot wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although mandatory laparotomy has been standard of care for patients with abdominal gunshot wounds (GSWs) for decades, this approach is associated with non-therapeutic operations, morbidity, and long hospital stays. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to summarize outcomes of selective nonoperative management (SNOM) of civilian abdominal GSWs.

Methods

We searched electronic databases (March 1966-April 1, 2017) and reference lists of articles included in the systematic review for studies reporting outcomes of SNOM of civilian abdominal GSWs. We meta-analyzed the associated risks of SNOM-related failure (defined as laparotomy during hospital admission), mortality, and morbidity across included studies using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed by calculating I2 statistics and conducting tests of homogeneity.

Results

Of 7155 citations identified, we included 41 studies [n = 22,847 patients with abdominal GSWs, of whom 6777 (29.7%) underwent SNOM]. The pooled risk of failure of SNOM in hemodynamically stable patients without a reduced level of consciousness or signs of peritonitis was 7.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.9-10.1%; I2 = 92.6%, homogeneity p < 0.001] while the pooled mortality associated with use of SNOM in this patient population was 0.4% (95% CI = 0.2-0.6%; I2 = 0%, homogeneity p > 0.99). In patients who failed SNOM, the pooled estimate of the risk of therapeutic laparotomy was 68.0% (95% CI = 58.3-77.7%; I2 = 91.5%; homogeneity p < 0.001). Risks of failure of SNOM were lowest in studies that evaluated patients with right thoracoabdomen (3.4%; 95% CI = 0-7.0%; I2 = 0%; homogeneity p = 0.45), flank (7.0%; 95% CI = 3.9-10.1%), and back (3.1%; 95% CI = 0-6.5%) GSWs and highest in those that evaluated patients with anterior abdomen (13.2%; 95% CI = 6.3-20.1%) GSWs. In patients who underwent mandatory abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT), the pooled risk of failure was 4.1% versus 8.3% in those who underwent selective CT (p = 0.08). The overall sample-size-weighted mean hospital length of stay among patients who underwent SNOM was 6 days versus 10 days if they failed SNOM or developed an in-hospital complication.

Conclusions

SNOM of abdominal GSWs is safe when conducted in hemodynamically stable patients without a reduced level of consciousness or signs of peritonitis. Failure of SNOM may be lower in patients with GSWs to the back, flank, or right thoracoabdomen and be decreased by mandatory use of abdominopelvic CT scans.