Evolving concepts in the management of colonic injury

Indications for and outcome of primary repair compared with faecal diversion in the management of traumatic colon injury

AIM

Injuries of the colon are a serious sequel of abdominal trauma owing to the associated morbidity and mortality. This study aims to assess postoperative outcome and complications of faecal diversion and primary repair of colon injuries when applied according to established guidelines for the management of colon injuries.

METHOD

This retrospective study was conducted on 110 patients with colon injuries. Guided by estimation of risk factors, patients were managed either by primary repair alone, repair with proximal diversion or diversion alone.

RESULTS

There were 102 (92.7%) male patients and 8 (7.3%) female patients of median age 38 years. Thirty-seven were managed by primary repair and 73 by faecal diversion. Colon injuries were caused by penetrating abdominal trauma in 65 and blunt trauma in 45 patients. Forty-three patients were in shock on admission, and were all managed by faecal diversion. Forty patients developed 84 complications after surgery. Primary repair had a significantly lower complication rate than faecal diversion (P = 0.037). Wound infection was the commonest complication. The overall mortality rate was 3.6%.

CONCLUSION

Primary repair, when employed properly, resulted in a significantly lower complication rate than faecal diversion. Significant predictive factors associated with a higher complication rate were faecal diversion, severe faecal contamination, multiple colon injuries, an interval of more than 12 h after colon injury and shock.

Colon anastomosis after damage control laparotomy: recommendations from 174 trauma colectomies

BACKGROUND

Primary colonic anastomosis in trauma patients has been demonstrated to be safe. However, few studies have investigated this in the setting of damage control laparotomy. We hypothesized that colonic anastomosis for trauma patients requiring an open abdomen (OA) would have a higher anastomotic leak (AL) rate when compared with patients having an immediate abdominal closure following trauma laparotomy.

METHODS

We performed a cohort comparison study of all trauma patients who underwent colectomy, between the years 2004 and 2009. Exclusion criteria were mortality within 24 hours of admission or colectomy for indications unrelated to injury. Data collected included age, gender, injury severity score, mechanism, length of stay, and mortality. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the relationship of OA to our primary outcome measure, AL.

RESULTS

Totally, 174 patients met study criteria. Fecal diversion was performed in 58 patients, and colonic anastomosis was performed in the remaining 116 patients. Patients with OA had a clinically significant increase in AL rate compared with immediate abdominal closure (6% vs. 27%, p=0.002). Logistic regression demonstrated that OA was independently associated with AL, with OA patients having more than a sixfold increase in odds of AL compared with those who were closed (odds ratio=6.37, p=0.002, area under the receiver operator curve=0.72). Transfusion requirement and left-sided anastomosis were risk factors for leak.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with a colonic anastomosis and an OA have an unacceptably high leak rate compared with those who undergo reconstruction with immediate closure. Given the significant risk of AL, colonic anastomosis should not be routinely performed in patients with OA.

Primary repair of colon injuries: clinical study of nonselective approach

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to determine the role of primary repair and to investigate the possibility of expanding indications for primary repair of colon injuries using nonselective approach.

METHODS

Two groups of patients were analyzed. Retrospective (RS) group included 30 patients managed by primary repair or two stage surgical procedure according to criteria published by Stone (S/F) and Flint (Fl). In this group 18 patients were managed by primary repair. Prospective (PR) group included 33 patients with primary repair as a first choice procedure. In this group, primary repair was performed in 30 cases.

RESULTS

Groups were comparable regarding age, sex, and indexes of trauma severity. Time between injury and surgery was shorter in PR group, (1.3 vs. 3.1 hours). Stab wounds were more frequent in PR group (9:2), and iatrogenic lesions in RS group (6:2). Associated injuries were similar, as well as segmental distribution of colon injuries. S/F criteria and Flint grading were similar.In RS group 15 primary repairs were successful, while in two cases relaparotomy and colostomy was performed due to anastomotic leakage. One patient died. In PR group, 25 primary repairs were successful, with 2 immediate and 3 postoperative (7-10 days) deaths, with no evidence of anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study justify more liberal use of primary repair in early management of colon injuries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN94682396.

Current management of large bowel injuries and factors influencing outcome

BACKGROUND

Colonic and intra-peritoneal rectal injuries may be managed by primary repair and extra-peritoneal rectal injuries by diverting colostomy. This study was undertaken to document our experience with this approach and to identify factors which might impact on outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospective study of all patients treated for colon and rectal injuries in one surgical ward at King Edward VIII hospital, Durban, over a 7-year period (1998-2004). Demographic data, clinical presentation, findings at laparotomy and outcome were documented.

RESULTS

Of 488 patients undergoing laparotomy, 177 (36%) had injuries to the colon and rectum with age 29.8+/-10.9 years. Injury mechanisms were firearms (118) stabs (54) and blunt trauma (5). Delay before laparotomy was 10+/-9.3 h. Complication and mortality rates were 36% and 17%, respectively. 68 patients (38%) required ICU management. Shock on admission and increased transfusion requirements were associated with a significantly increased mortality. Patients with delay < or = 12 h before laparotomy had a higher mortality rate than those with delay >12 h. The mortality rate increased with the number of associated injuries and it was higher the higher the Injury Severity Score (ISS); it was similar for stabs, firearms and blunt trauma. Hospital stay was 9.5+/-9.2 days.

CONCLUSION

We reaffirm that primary repair is appropriate for colonic and intra-peritoneal rectal injuries and that extra-peritoneal rectal injuries require diverting colostomy. Shock on admission, increased blood transfusion requirements, associated organ injury and severity of the injury were associated with high mortality.

Diagnosis and management of colonic injuries following blunt trauma

AIM: To retrospectively evaluate the preoperative diagnostic approaches and management of colonic injuries following blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS: A total of 82 patients with colonic injuries caused by blunt trauma between January 1992 and December 2005 were enrolled. Data were collected on clinical presentation, investigations, diagnostic methods, associated injuries, and operative management. Colonic injury-related mortality and abdominal complications were analyzed.

RESULTS: Colonic injuries were caused mainly by motor vehicle accidents. Of the 82 patients, 58 (70.3%) had other associated injuries. Laparotomy was performed within 6 h after injury in 69 cases (84.1%), laparoscopy in 3 because of haemodynamic instability. The most commonly injured site was located in the transverse colon. The mean colon injury scale score was 2.8. The degree of faecal contamination was classified as mild in 18 (22.0%), moderate in 42 (51.2%), severe in 14 (17.1%), and unknown in 8 (9.8%) cases. Sixty-seven patients (81.7%) were treated with primary repair or resection and anastomosis. Faecal stream diversion was performed in 15 cases (18.3%). The overall mortality rate was 6.1%. The incidence of colonic injury-related abdominal complications was 20.7%. The only independent predictor of complications was the degree of peritoneal faecal contamination (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION: Colonic injuries following blunt trauma are especially important because of the severity and complexity of associated injuries. A thorough physical examination and a combination of tests can be used to evaluate the indications for laparotomy. One stage management at the time of initial exploration is most often used for colonic injuries.

When Trauma Means a Stoma

Trauma is a leading cause of death and disability. When traumatic injuries require ostomy surgery, the wound, ostomy, and continence nurse acts as a crucial part of the trauma team. This literature review describes mechanisms of injury associated with creation of a stoma, key aspects of wound, ostomy, and continence nursing care in trauma populations and presents suggestions for future research.

Colon and rectal injuries

PURPOSE

This study was designed to develop treatment algorithms for colon, rectal, and anal injuries based on the review of relevant literature.

METHODS

Information was obtained through a MEDLINE ( www.nobi.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi ) search, and additional references were obtained through cross-referencing key articles cited in these papers.

RESULTS

A total of 203 articles were considered relevant.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of penetrating and blunt colon, rectal, and anal injuries has evolved during the past 150 years. Since the World War II mandate to divert penetrating colon injuries, primary repair or resection and anastomosis have found an increasing role in patients with nondestructive injuries. A critical review of recent literature better defines the role of primary repair and fecal diversion for these injuries and allows for better algorithms for the management of these injuries.

New trends in the management of colonic trauma

BACKGROUND

The management of colon trauma seems to have swung from the "diversion dogma" to a more liberal use of primary repair. However, there are still debatable issues, regarding the management of destructive injuries of the left colon.

METHODS

A review of the current literature on the management of colon trauma was performed using PubMed, with secondary references obtained from key articles.

CONCLUSION

There is strong evidence from prospective randomised trials that the vast majority of colonic injuries can be safely managed by primary repair. It seems, however, that there is a limited role for colostomy, particularly in high-risk patients with destructive injuries of the left colon. The final decision should be based on available scientific evidence in combination with personal experience and clinical judgement on the given patient.

Back to basics: managing gunshot injuries in East Timor

BACKGROUND

The management of patients following severe trauma requires a combination of skills. Among these are accurate clinical assessment, basic resuscitation measures, basic general surgical skills and techniques, good decision making and team leadership. More technically advanced imaging and investigations are often useful and can enhance clinical assessment but should not replace the basic elements. In situations where more advanced investigations are not available good outcomes can be achieved by application of the basic principles in trauma management and surgery. This article describes a mass casualty situation of gunshot wounds managed with limited resources and the outcomes.

METHODS

A series of gunshot wounds managed in a single day at Dili National Hospital, Dili, East Timor is described. The presentation of the patients, initial assessment of injuries and haemodynamic stability are detailed in addition to the subsequent surgical treatment, complications and outcomes. The information was obtained from hospital records and personal recollection of the treating doctors. All injuries were documented with digital photography. All patients were managed by two surgeons who also supervised their postoperative course and reported on their outcomes. Surgical procedures on all of the patients were performed by the named two consultant surgeons and one basic surgical trainee.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients were treated for gunshot injuries. All were single bullet injuries. Six trajectories involved the thoracic or abdominal cavity (one trajectory traversed both). Eight injuries were to limbs or soft tissue of the pelvis and included four compound fractures. Surgical intervention was needed for all patients ranging from emergency laparotomy for haemodynamic instability through to wound debridements. Thirteen patients survived and were discharged from hospital within 3 weeks. One patient died of uncontrolled haemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present series of gunshot injuries managed with limited resources a good outcome was achieved with the application of basic principles. The present series emphasizes the importance of basic trauma management as outlined in courses such as Emergency Management of Severe Trauma and the use of basic surgical techniques as taught during the Advanced Surgical training program.

Penetrating vascular trauma in Johannesburg, South Africa

An awareness that time crucially affects outcome underpins the principles of management of vascular injury. Patients with hard signs of vascular injury should undergo urgent exploration. Soft signs mandate investigation, and arteriography is still the standard of care. Noninvasive vascular imaging may prove its worth in the future. All patients with penetrating arterial injury should receive broad-spectrum antibiotic prophylaxis. Early repair of carotid artery injury provides the best likelihood of a neurologically intact survivor. There is a definite and emerging role of endovascular therapy both for difficult access injuries and for the later complications of vascular injury, such as false aneurysm and arteriovenous fistulas. The experimental and clinical evidence for the use of intraluminal shunts in peripheral vascular injury is compelling, and experience in their use is accumulating. Vascular trauma is complex and ideally is carried out by experts in a multidisciplinary environment; resuscitation and prompt revascularization are likely to lead to satisfactory outcomes. The major trauma load in South Africa represents an unparalleled experience in management of vascular injury, which seems likely to continue for the foreseeable future.