Laparoscopy for blunt abdominal trauma: a challenging endeavor

Quantifying lens obstructions in minimally invasive surgery: the impact on performance and outcomes

Surgeons performing laparoscopic surgery depend primarily on their vision to operate, but it often gets obstructed by fog, smoke, and other debris. This mini-review examines the literature on lens obstruction, aiming to quantify its prevalence, identify factors affecting its frequency, evaluate its impacts on surgeons and patients, and present an overview of mitigation methods. The review reveals that there are typically between 3.5-15 lens obstruction events per procedure, and surgeons spend between 19% and 52% of the procedure with suboptimal vision. Additionally, 2% to 8% of the operating time is devoted to cleaning the scope. Factors influencing the frequency of lens obstructions include instrument selection, operating time, and surgeon experience. Lens obstructions may increase operating time, the risk of medical errors, and mental fatigue, though quantifiable results on this subject remain sparse. The review also highlights significant knowledge gaps in the field of lens obstructions during minimally invasive procedures and proposes several recommendations to accelerate research in this area.

Nationwide Trends in Utilization of Minimally Invasive Techniques for Blunt Abdominal Trauma

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing use of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques for trauma, limited large-scale studies have evaluated trends, outcomes, and resource utilization at centers that utilize MIS modalities for blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

Operative adult admissions after blunt assault, falls, or vehicular collisions were tabulated from the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients who received diagnostic laparoscopy or other laparoscopic and robotic intervention were classified as MIS. Institutions with at least one MIS trauma operation in a year were defined as an MIS Performing Institution (MPI; rest: non-MPI). The primary endpoint was mortality, with secondary outcomes of reoperation, complication, postoperative length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization costs. Mixed regression models were used to determine the association of MPI status on the outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Throughout the study period, the proportion of MIS operations and MPI significantly increased from 22.6 to 29.8% and 45.9 to 58.8%, respectively. Of an estimated 77,480 patients, 66.7% underwent care at MPI. After adjustment, MPI status was not associated with increased odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] [.96,1.24]), reoperation (AOR 1.02, CI [.87,1.19]), or any of the tabulated complications. There was additionally no difference in adjusted LOS (β-.18, CI [-.85, +.49]) or costs (β+$1600, CI [-1600, +4800]), between MPI and non-MPI.

DISCUSSION

The use of MIS operations in blunt abdominal trauma has significantly increased, with performing centers experiencing no difference in mortality or resource utilization. Prospectively collected data on outcomes following MIS trauma surgery is necessary to elucidate appropriate applications.

Outcomes and Its Associated Factors among Patients with Abdominal Trauma Requiring Laparotomy at Asella Referral and Teaching Hospital, South Central Ethiopia: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study

Trauma is a serious public health problem, and abdominal injuries are among the leading causes of hospitalization after trauma. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the outcome of abdominal trauma and its predictors in patients who underwent laparotomy at Asella Referral and Teaching Hospital (ARTH), South Central Ethiopia. We conducted a retrospective institutional based cross-sectional study of patients who underwent laparotomy for abdominal trauma at ARTH from October 1, 2015, to September 30, 2020. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to determine associations between independent factors and mortality due to abdominal trauma, and a P value of <0.05 indicated statistical significance. Out of 139 patients, 110 (79.1%) were males and 88 (63.3%) aged <30 years old, with a mean age of 29 ± 15.73 years. The most common mechanism of injury was penetrating trauma, which accounted for 94 (67.6%) patients. The mortality rate was 21 (15.1%). Factors such as blunt mechanism of injury (95% CI: AOR: 3.36, 1.24-9.09), SBP < 90 mmHg at presentation (95% CI: AOR = 9.37, 3.28-26.80), time >6 hours from trauma to admission (95% CI: AOR: 5.44, 1.78-16.63), unstable intraoperative patient condition (95% CI: AOR = 8.82, 3.05-25.52), and patients who need blood transfusion (95% CI: AOR: 6.63, 1.92-22.91) were significantly associated with mortality. The mortality rate of abdominal trauma patients who underwent laparotomy was high. Therefore, healthcare providers should provide priority for traumatic patients as prolonged waiting time to get healthcare results in poor outcomes for the patients.

Impaired robotic surgical visualization: archaic issues in a modern operating room

While robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has been revolutionizing surgical procedures, it has various areas needing improvement, specifically in the visualization sector. Suboptimal vision due to lens occlusions has been a topic of concern in laparoscopic surgery but has not received much attention in robotic surgery. This study is one of the first to explore and quantify the degree of disruption encountered due to poor robotic visualization at a major academic center. In case observations across 28 RAS procedures in various specialties, any lens occlusions or "debris" events that appeared on the monitor displays and clinicians' reactions, the cause, and the location across the monitor for these events were recorded. Data were then assessed for any trends using analysis as described below. From around 44.33 h of RAS observation time, 163 debris events were recorded. 52.53% of case observation time was spent under a compromised visual field. In a subset of 15 cases, about 2.24% of the average observation time was spent cleaning the lens. Additionally, cautery was found to be the primary cause of lens occlusions and little variation was found within the spread of the debris across the monitor display. This study illustrates that in 6 (21.43%) of the cases, 90% of the observation time was spent under compromised visualization while only 2 (7.14%) of the cases had no debris or cleaning events. Additionally, we observed that cleaning the lens can be troublesome during the procedure, interrupting the operating room flow.

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.

Laparoscopy in the Evaluation of Blunt Abdominal Injury in Level-I and II Pediatric Trauma Centers

Introduction

An American College of Surgeons (ACS) Level-I (L-I) pediatric trauma center demonstrated successful laparoscopy without conversion to laparotomy in ∼65% of trauma cases. Prior reports have demonstrated differences in outcomes based on ACS level of trauma center. We sought to compare laparoscopy use for blunt abdominal trauma at L-I compared to Level-II (L-II) centers.

Methods

The Pediatric Trauma Quality Improvement Program was queried (2014-2016) for patients ≤16 years old who underwent any abdominal surgery. Bivariate analyses comparing patients undergoing abdominal surgery at ACS L-I and L-II centers were performed.

Results

970 patients underwent abdominal surgery with 14% using laparoscopy. Level-I centers had an increased rate of laparoscopy (15.6% vs 9.7%, P = .019 ); however they had a lower mean Injury Severity Score (16.2 vs 18.5, P = .002) compared to L-II centers. Level-I and L-II centers had similar length of stay ventilator days, and SSIs (all P > .05).

Conclusion

While use of laparoscopy for pediatric trauma remains low, there was increased use at L-I compared to L-II centers with no difference in LOS or SSIs. Future studies are needed to elucidate which pediatric trauma patients benefit from laparoscopic surgery.

Controversies in Surgery: Trauma

As care of the injured patient continues to evolve, new surgical technologies and new resuscitative therapies can change the algorithms that drive trauma care. In particular, the advent of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta has changed the way trauma surgeons treat patients in extremis. The science of resuscitation continues to evolve, leading to controversy about the optimal administration of fluid and blood products. Laparoscopy has given additional tools to the trauma surgeon to potentially avoid exploratory laparotomy, and rib fracture fixation can be beneficial in the proper patient.

The Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopy for Blunt Abdominal Trauma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The efficacy and safety of laparoscopy for blunt trauma remain controversial. This systemic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the usefulness of laparoscopy in blunt trauma. The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched up to 23 February 2021. Meta-analyses were performed using odds ratios (ORs), standardized mean differences (SMDs), and overall proportions. Overall, 19 studies with a total of 1520 patients were included. All patients were hemodynamically stable. In the laparoscopy group, meta-analysis showed lesser blood loss (SMD −0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.51 to −0.05, I² = 62%) and shorter hospital stay (SMD −0.67, 95% CI −0.90 to −0.43, I² = 47%) compared with the laparotomy group. Pooled prevalence of missed injury (0.003 (95% CI 0 to 0.023), I² = 0%), nontherapeutic laparotomy (0.004 (95% CI 0.001 to 0.026), I² = 0%), and mortality (0.021 (95% CI 0.010 to 0.043), I² = 0%) were very low in blunt trauma. In subgroup analysis, recently published studies (2011–present) showed lesser conversion rate (0.115 (95% CI 0.067 to 0.190) vs. 0.391 (95% CI 0.247 to 0.556), test for subgroup difference: p < 0.01). This meta-analysis suggests that laparoscopy is a safe and feasible option in hemodynamic stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

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.

Laparoscopic splenectomy after trauma: Who, when and how. A systematic review

Importance:

A deep knowledge of the indication for laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) in trauma case can lead trauma surgeon to offer in a wider number of situations a minimally invasive approach to a common injuries.

Objective:

To present and review the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic approach for spleen trauma and to identify patient whose can benefit from a minimally invasive approach versus patient that need open surgery to assess the whole severity of trauma.

Evidence Review:

A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA statement in order to identify articles reporting LS after trauma. A literature search was performed through MEDLINE (through PubMed), Embase and Google Scholar from January 1990 to December 2018. Studies conducted on animals were not considered. All other laparoscopic procedures for spleen trauma were excluded.

Results:

Nineteen articles were included in this study, reporting 212 LS after trauma. The most study includes blunt trauma patient. All LS were performed in haemodynamically stable patient. Post-operative complications were reported in all articles with a median post-operative morbidity rate of 30 patients (14.01%), including 16 (7.5%) post-operative deaths.

Conclusions and Relevance:

This article reports the feasibility and safety of a minimally invasive approach for common trauma injuries which can help non-advanced laparoscopic skill trauma surgeon to develop the best indication to when to adopt this kind of approach.

Are we doing too many non-therapeutic laparotomies in trauma? An analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank

BACKGROUND

Exploratory laparotomy (EL) has been the definitive diagnostic and therapeutic modality for operative abdominal trauma in the US. Recently, many trauma centers have started using diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) in stable trauma patients in an effort to reduce the incidence of non-therapeutic laparotomy (NL). We aim to evaluate the incidence of NL in the trauma population in the US and compare the outcomes between DL and NL.

METHODS

Using ICD-9 codes, the National Trauma Data Bank (2010-2015) was queried for patients undergoing any abdominal surgical intervention. Patients were divided into two groups: diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) and exploratory laparotomy (EL). Hemodynamically unstable patients on arrival and patients with abbreviated injury score (AIS) > 3 were excluded. Patients in EL group without any codes for gastrointestinal, diaphragmatic, hepatic, splenic, vascular, or urological procedures were considered to have undergone NL. After excluding patients who were converted to open from the DL group, multivariate regression models were used to analyze the outcomes of DL vs NL group with respect to mortality, length of stay, and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 3197 patients underwent NL vs 1323 patients who underwent DL. Compared to DL group, the NL group were older (mean age: 35 vs. 31, P < 0.01). Rate of penetrating injury was 77% vs 86% for patients in NL vs DL. On multivariate analysis, NL was associated with increased mortality (OR 4.5, 95% CI 2.1-9.7), higher rate of complications (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.3), and a longer hospital stay (OR 2.7, 95% CI 2.1-3.5). NL was also associated with higher rates of pneumonia, VTE, ARDS, and cardiac arrest.

CONCLUSION

With increasing experience in minimally invasive surgery, DL should be a part of the armamentarium of trauma surgeons. This study supports that in well-selected trauma patients DL has favorable outcomes compared to NL. These findings warrant further investigation.