Surgical Management of Abdominal Trauma: Hollow Viscus Injury

Complex Traumatic Jejunal Perforation With Mesenteric Tear and Intussusception: A Case Report

Blunt abdominal trauma can result in a spectrum of injuries, ranging from superficial contusions to severe hollow viscus perforations. We present the case of a 52-year-old male involved in a bicycle-truck collision, leading to complex intra-abdominal injuries. The patient presented with acute abdominal pain and signs of peritonitis, prompting urgent diagnostic workup and surgical intervention. Imaging studies revealed pneumoperitoneum, free fluid, and multiple rib fractures indicative of significant trauma. Exploratory laparotomy unveiled a perforated jejunal loop with an associated mesenteric tear and intussusception, necessitating segmental bowel resection and repair. Histopathological analysis confirmed acute hemorrhagic inflammation consistent with traumatic perforation. This case highlights the challenges and complexities associated with blunt abdominal trauma, emphasizing the importance of prompt recognition, multidisciplinary management, and surgical intervention in optimizing patient outcomes.

Gastrointestinal Perforation with Blunt Abdominal Trauma in Children

Gastrointestinal tract perforation is uncommon in children, accounting for <10% of cases of blunt abdominal trauma. Diagnosis of bowel perforation in children can be challenging due to poor diagnostic imaging accuracy. Intra-abdominal free air is found only in half of the children with bowel perforation. Ultrasound findings are nonspecific and suspicious for perforation in only two-thirds of cases. A computer tomography (CT) scan has a sensitivity and specificity of 50% and 95%, respectively. Surgical decisions should be made based on clinical examination despite normal CT results. Management of bowel perforation in children includes primary repair in 50-70% and resection with anastomosis in 20-40% of cases.

Accuracy of CT Scan for Detecting Hollow Viscus Injury in Penetrating Abdominal Trauma

BACKGROUND

In penetrating abdominal trauma, computed tomography (CT) is routinely performed to evaluate stable patients for selective non-operative management (SNOM). Triple-contrast CT (oral, rectal, and IV) has traditionally been used. However, due to its disadvantages, most trauma centres, including our unit at the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital (CMJAH), now perform single-contrast intravenous-only CT scans. We performed a retrospective review to determine the accuracy of single-contrast CT scans for detecting hollow viscus injuries (HVI) in penetrating abdominal trauma.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who presented to CMJAH with penetrating abdominal injuries was performed between 01 August 2017 and 31 August 2019 and were evaluated for SNOM with CT (IV contrast only). Patient records were reviewed to determine pertinent demographics, mechanism, and site of injury, as well as metabolic parameters. CT findings were compared to findings at laparotomy.

RESULTS

A total of 437 patients met the inclusion criteria. The majority were male (92.7%), with a mean age of 31.5 yrs (SD 8.7). Injuries were predominantly due to stab wounds (72,5%, n = 317). CT scan was negative in 342 patients, of which 314 completed SNOM successfully. A total of 93 patients proceeded to laparotomy. CT had a sensitivity of 95.1%, specificity of 44.2%, positive predictive value of 57.4%, and negative predictive value of 92%.

CONCLUSION

Single-contrast CT in penetrating abdominal trauma is a valuable investigative tool in identifying patients for SNOM. Features of HVI on single-contrast CT are not very specific and should be interpreted along with other clinical factors including wound trajectory and serial abdominal examinations. Other associated injuries such as diaphragmatic and solid organ injuries should be considered in the final management plan.

Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography findings for hollow viscus injuries following thoracoabdominal gunshot wounds

BACKGROUND

Selective nonoperative management (SNOM) of abdominal gunshot wounds (GSWs) is increasingly used as computed tomography (CT) has become a diagnostic adjunct for the evaluation of intraabdominal injuries including hollow viscus injuries (HVIs). Currently, there is scarce data on the diagnostic accuracy of CT for identifying HVI. The purpose of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of different CT findings in the diagnosis of HVI following abdominal GSW.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center cohort study was performed from January 2015 to April 2019. We included consecutive patients (≥18 years) with abdominal GSW for whom SNOM was attempted and an abdominal CT was obtained as a part of SNOM. Computed tomography findings including abdominal free fluid, diffuse abdominal free air, focal gastrointestinal wall thickness, wall irregularity, abnormal wall enhancement, fat stranding, and mural defect were used as our index tests. Outcomes were determined by the presence of HVI during laparotomy and test performance characteristics were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the 212 patients included for final analysis (median age: 28 years), 43 patients (20.3%) underwent a laparotomy with HVI confirmed intraoperatively whereas 169 patients (79.7%) were characterized as not having HVI. The sensitivity of abdominal free fluid was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92-100). The finding of a mural defect had a high specificity (99%, 95% CI: 97-100). Other findings with high specificity were abnormal wall enhancement (97%, 95% CI: 93-99) and wall irregularity (96%, 95% CI: 92-99).

CONCLUSION

While there was no singular CT finding that confirmed the diagnosis of HVI following abdominal GSW, the absence of intraabdominal free fluid could be used to rule out HVI. In addition, the presence of a mural defect, abnormal wall enhancement, or wall irregularity is considered as a strong predictor of HVI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Test or Criteria; Level II.

Late Presentation of Peritonitis Post Jejunal Perforation Due to Flank Stab Wound

Abdominal trauma injuries are caused by many mechanisms including blunt and penetrating trauma injuries. Penetrating injuries are far more common than blunt injuries. Subsequently, the most affected organ during such injuries is small intestine perforations. As far as we know, there were no cases reported before about jejunal injury due to penetrating trauma. We present a case of a 20-year-old male with a stab wound injury who was initially stable in the emergency department (ED). After a set of investigations were done, the patient was discharged home. Yet, the patient presented again with late signs of peritonitis. Imaging was done and showed pneumoperitoneum. Thereafter, the patient was rushed to the operation room (OR) where the jejunal repair was performed. ED physicians must be vigilant regarding any signs of deterioration in penetrating trauma patients and should provide clear instructions to patients regarding any symptoms of the acute abdomen before any discharge.

A Study on Trauma Mechanisms and Injury Sites in Patients with Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Background

Although blunt abdominal trauma is sometimes readily identified in patients with trauma, its diagnosis and treatment can be delayed due to various limitations including unconsciousness or unstable vital functions, which may cause shock due to blood loss and sepsis. Confirming the correlation between the specific damage of the abdominal organ and the recommended surgical intervention will allow for predicting abdominal damage based on the specific underlying trauma mechanisms.

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the proportion of patients with blunt trauma resulting from intraabdominal injury who received surgical intervention (surgery and angioembolization [A/E]), stratified by trauma mechanism and to examine which organs were damaged per different trauma incident.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical characteristics of 2,291 patients in a tertiary trauma center. Clinical characteristics included age, sex, injury severity score, trauma mechanism (car, motorcycle, pedestrian, bicycle, ship or train accident, fall, slipping or rolling down, bumping, crush injury, explosion burn, and others), abdominal surgical intervention, damaged organ, and A/E site.

Results

One-fourth of the patients with blunt trauma required surgical intervention in the abdomen. In particular, the mesentery or bowel was the main injured area for abdominal surgery in all mechanisms, and the spleen or liver was the main damaged organ subjected to A/E. Therefore, we should consider that a substantial proportion of patients with trauma do require abdominal surgery. In particular, repeated physical examination and imaging tests are necessary when the patients are unconscious or their vital functions are unstable for accurate confirmation of injury.

Epidemiology and management of abdominal injuries in children

BACKGROUND

Although more guideline-adherent care has been described in pediatric compared to adult trauma centers, we aimed to provide a more detailed characterization of management and resource utilization of children with intra-abdominal injury (IAI) within pediatric centers. Our primary objective was to describe the epidemiology, diagnostic evaluation, and management of children with IAI across U.S. children's hospitals. Our secondary objective was to describe the interhospital variation in surgical management of children with IAI.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of 33 hospitals in the Pediatric Health Information System. We included children aged <18 years evaluated in the emergency department from 2010 to 2019 with IAI, as defined by ICD coding, and who underwent an abdominal computed tomography (CT). Our primary outcome was abdominal surgery. We categorized IAI by organ system and described resource utilization data. We used generalized linear regression to calculate adjusted hospital-level proportions of abdominal surgery, with a random effect for hospital.

RESULTS

We studied 9265 children with IAI. Median (IQR) age was 9.0 (6.0-13.0) years. Abdominal surgery was performed in 16% (n = 1479) of children, with the lowest proportion of abdominal surgery observed in children aged <5 years. Liver (38.6%) and spleen (32.1%) were the most common organs injured. A total of 3.1% of children with liver injuries and 2.8% with splenic injuries underwent abdominal surgery. Although there was variation in rates of surgery across hospitals (p < 0.001), only three of 33 hospitals had rates that were statistically different from the aggregate mean of 16%.

CONCLUSIONS

Most children with IAI are managed nonoperatively, and most children's hospitals manage children with IAI similarly. These data can be used to inform future benchmarking efforts across hospitals to assess concordance with guidelines for the management of children with IAI.

How long of a postponement in surgery can a blunt hollow viscus injury patient tolerate? A retrospective study from the National Trauma Data Bank

BACKGROUND

In the management of patients with blunt abdominal trauma, delayed diagnosis and treatment of hollow viscus injury can occur. We assessed the effect of the time to surgery on the outcomes of blunt hollow viscus injury patients.

METHODS

The National Trauma Data Bank was queried from 2012 to 2015 to identify patients with blunt hollow viscus injury for inclusion. Patients with unstable hemodynamics, concomitant intra-abdominal organ injuries, or other severe extra-abdominal injuries were excluded. Inverse probability of treatment weighting and multivariate logistic regression were used to evaluate the effect of the time to surgery on the outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 2,997 patients with blunt hollow viscus injury were studied; the mean time to abdominal surgery was 6.7 hours. Twenty-two hours was selected as a cutoff value for further analyses because of an observed transition zone at that time in the distribution of mortality and severe sepsis rates. After adjustment, patients who underwent surgery within 22 hours had a significantly lower mortality rate (1.2% vs 4.2%), lower sepsis rate (0.9% vs 4.5%), shorter hospital length of stay (8.7 vs 12.0 days), and shorter intensive care unit length of stay (1.4 vs 3.3 days). In patients who underwent surgery within 22 hours, neither mortality nor sepsis were affected significantly by the time to surgery.

CONCLUSION

In the management of patients with blunt hollow viscus injury, early surgical treatment is needed. Patients with isolated blunt hollow viscus injury may have a poor outcome if they undergo abdominal surgery more than 22 hours after arrival in the emergency department.

Combined stomach and duodenal perforating injury following blunt abdominal trauma: a case report and literature review

Background

Gastrointestinal injury following blunt abdominal trauma is uncommon; a combined stomach and duodenal perforating injury is even more rare. Because these two organs are located in different spaces in the abdomen, such injuries are difficult to identify.

Case presentation

A young woman involved in a motor vehicle crash presented to our emergency department with concerns of severe peritonitis. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography of the abdomen revealed pneumoperitoneum and retroperitoneal hematoma in zone 1. An emergency laparotomy was performed, revealing a stomach-perforating injury, which was resolved with primary repair. No obvious injury was observed on retroperitoneal exploration. However, peritonitis presented again on the second postoperative day, and a second laparotomy was performed, revealing a duodenum-perforating injury in its third portion. We performed primary repair with multi-tube-ostomy. The patient recovered well without permanent tube placement or internal bypass.

Conclusions

Assessing associated injuries in blunt abdominal trauma is crucial because they may be fatal if timely intervention is not undertaken. These types of complicated injuries require a feasible surgical strategy formulated by experienced surgeons, which gives the patient a better chance of survival.

Blunt small bowel perforation (SBP): An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter update 15 years later

BACKGROUND

Previous work demonstrated diagnostic delays in blunt small bowel perforation (SBP) with increased mortality and inability of scans to reliably exclude the diagnosis. We conducted a follow-up multicenter study to determine if these challenges persist 15 years later.

METHODS

We selected adult cases with blunt injury, International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision or current procedural terminology (CPT) indicating small bowel surgery, no other major injury and at least one abdominal computed tomography (CT) within initial 6 hours. Controls had blunt trauma with abdominal CT but not SBP. After institutional review board approval, data from each center were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Data from 39 centers (from October 2013 to September 2015) showed 127,919 trauma admissions and 94,743 activations. Twenty-five centers were Level 1. Centers submitted 77 patients (mean age, 39; male, 68%; mean length of stay, 11.3 days) and 131 controls (mean age, 44; male, 64.9%; length of stay, 3.6 days). Small bowel perforation cases were 0.06% of admissions and 0.08% of activations. Mean time to surgery was 8.7 hours (median, 3.7 hours). Initial CT showed free air in 31 cases (43%) and none in controls. Initial CT was within normal in three cases (4.2%) and 84 controls (64%). Five cases had a second scan; two showed free air (one had an initial normal scan). One death occurred among the patients (mortality, 1.4%; and time to surgery, 16.9 hours). Regression analysis showed sex, abdominal tenderness, distention, peritonitis, bowel wall thickening, free fluid, and contrast extravasation were significantly associated with SBP.

CONCLUSIONS

Blunt SBP remains relatively uncommon and continues to present a diagnostic challenge. Trauma centers have shortened time to surgery with decreased case mortality. Initial CT scans continue to miss a small number of cases with potentially serious consequences. We recommend (1) intraperitoneal abnormalities on CT scan should always evoke high suspicion and (2) strong consideration of additional diagnostic/therapeutic intervention by 8 hours after arrival in patients who continue to pose a clinical challenge.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Observational study, level III.

Laparoscopy for blunt abdominal trauma: a challenging endeavor

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Laparoscopy in blunt abdominal trauma is challenging because of multiple associated injuries, higher trauma score values and higher morbidity and mortality, as compared with patients with penetrating abdominal trauma. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of laparoscopy in the management of blunt abdominal trauma patients and to highlight related challenges.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Over a 4-year period, patients managed laparoscopically for blunt abdominal trauma were retrospectively analyzed. Perioperative details, indications for laparoscopy and conversion, complications, and length of hospital stay were discussed.

RESULTS

A total of 35 stable patients underwent laparoscopy. The mean Injury Severity Score was 12 (4-38). Therapeutic laparoscopy was performed in 15 (56%) and diagnostic in 12 (44%) patients. Eight (23%) patients were converted to therapeutic laparotomy. Intraoperative bleeding, complex injuries, visualization problem, and equipment failure necessitated conversion. Three (30%) patients with negative computed tomography scan had therapeutic laparoscopy for mesenteric injuries. There were no missed injuries. The mean length of hospital stay was 11 days in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy for stable patients is feasible and safe. Multiple injuries make laparoscopy more difficult, and advanced laparoscopic skills are required. The conversion rate is high; however, the non-therapeutic laparotomies were completely eliminated in this study.

A Randomized Controlled Trial on Intra-Abdominal Irrigation during Emergency Trauma Laparotomy; Time for Yet Another Paradigm Shift

OBJECTIVE

To determine the optimal volume of abdominal irrigation that will prevent surgical site infections (both deep and superficial), eviscerations and fistula formations; and improve 30-day mortality in trauma patients.

METHODS

We conducted a three-arm parallel clinical superiority randomized controlled trial comparing different volumes of effluent (5, 10 and 20 liters) used in trauma patients (both blunt and penetrating) age 14 and above undergoing an emergency laparotomy between April 2002 and July 2004 in a busy urban Level 1 trauma center.

RESULTS

After randomization, a total of 204 patients were analyzed. All patient groups were comparable with respect to age, gender distribution, admission injury severity score, and mechanism of injury, estimated blood loss and degree of contamination. The mortality rate overall was 1.96% (4/204).No differences were noted with respect to contamination, wound infection, fistula formation, and evisceration. The twenty liter group (Group III) showed a trend toward an increased incidence of deep surgical site infections when compared to the five liter (Group I) (p=0.051) and ten liter (Group II) (p=0.057) groups. This did not however reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

The old surgical adage "the solution to pollution is dilution" is not applicable to trauma patients. Our results suggest that using more irrigation, even when large amounts of contamination have occurred, does not reduce post-operative complications or affect mortality; and it may predispose patients to increased incidence of abscess formation. (Trial registration number: ISRCTN66454589).