Evaluation of the multi-slice computed tomography outcomes in diaphragmatic injuries related to penetrating and blunt trauma

Current trends in the diagnosis and management of traumatic diaphragmatic injuries: A systematic review and a diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis of blunt trauma

BACKGROUND

Traumatic diaphragmatic injuries (TDI) are wounds or ruptures of the diaphragm due to thoraco-abdominal trauma. Nowadays, CT-scan is considered the gold standard for TDI diagnosis. The aim of this study was to assess the current diagnostic accuracy of CT-scan in the diagnosis of TDI and describe the management of this type of injury.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two independent reviewers searched the literature in a systematic fashion using online databases, including Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar. Human studies investigating the diagnosis and the following management of TDI were included. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and positive/negative likelihood (with corresponding 95% confidence intervals) were analyzed based on the bivariate model for blunt TDI. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies was used for the quality assessment of selected articles. The PROSPERO registration number was as follows: CRD42022301282.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies published between 2001 and 2019 were included. All included studies reported a contrast-enhanced computed tomography as the preferred method to obtain diagnostic imaging. Left-sided TDI was the type of injury most frequently found. False negative TDI at CT-scan were more frequent than false positive TDI (11.13 ± 23.24 vs. 2.66 ± 6.65). Six studies on blunt TDI were included in the meta-analysis, showing a high sensitivity [0.80 (95%CI 0.65-0.90)] and specificity [0.98 (95%CI 0.89-1.00)] of the CT-scan in detecting TDI. Overall, 7 articles reported laparotomy as the method of choice to repair TDI. Only 3 studies reported a laparoscopic and/or thoracoscopic approach to TDI repair.

CONCLUSION

CT-scan has a good sensitivity and specificity for blunt TDI diagnosis. However, TDI diagnosis and management are often delayed. The use of water-soluble contrast in CT-scan should be considered when the diagnosis of TDI is not defined after the first scan, and clinical suspicion is still high. In this context, a highly trained trauma team is essential for trauma management and correct imaging interpretation.

Management of traumatic diaphragmatic injury—A peep into bowel repair via thoracotomy

Background:

Materials and Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Unravelling the Mysteries of Traumatic Diaphragmatic Injury: An Up-to-Date Review

Traumatic diaphragmatic injury (TDI) is an underdiagnosed condition that has recently increased in prevalence due to its association with automobile collisions. The initial injury is often obscured by concurrent thoracic and abdominal injuries. Traumatic diaphragmatic injury itself is rarely lethal at initial presentation, however associated injuries and complications of untreated TDI such as herniation and strangulation of abdominal viscera have serious clinical consequences. There are 2 primary mechanisms of TDIs: penetrating TDI which tend to be smaller, more difficult to detect, and result in fewer complications; and blunt TDIs which are larger and have higher overall mortality due to associated injuries or delayed complications. The anatomy of thoracic and abdominal cavities distinguishes the epidemiology, pathophysiology, symptoms, treatment, and prognosis of right versus left TDI. Although there is no definitive radiologic sign for diagnosing TDI, many signs have been introduced in the literature and the concurrent presence of multiple signs increases the sensitivity of TDI detection. Conservative versus surgical management depends on mechanism of TDI, side, and most importantly the associated injuries.

Evaluation of Thoracoscopy with Single-Lumen Endotracheal Tube Intubation and Laparoscopy in the Diagnosis of Occult Diaphragmatic Injuries in Penetrating Thoracoabdominal Trauma

Background: The diagnosis of traumatic diaphragmatic injuries (TDIs) after penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma is challenging and conventional imaging is unreliable. Laparoscopy and thoracoscopy are minimally invasive modalities of choice in the diagnosis and management of TDI. A little is known on the value of thoracoscopy with single-lumen endotracheal tube intubation (SLETI) in the diagnosis of occult diaphragmatic injuries, and how it compares with laparoscopy. Methods: A prospective study evaluated thoracoscopy with SLETI as a diagnostic tool for occult TDI. Thoracoscopy was followed by diagnostic laparoscopy to confirm the findings and manage diaphragmatic and intra-abdominal injuries. Results: Thirty-one patients underwent thoracoscopy followed by laparoscopy. Majority were men (n = 27, 87%). The median age was 30 years. Twenty-six patients had stab wounds (83.8%), and 5 had gunshot wounds (16.1%). The incidence of diaphragmatic injury was 42% (n = 13). Thoracoscopy with SLETI correctly identified 12 (92%) patients with diaphragmatic injury, but 1 patient had dense pleural adhesions. Diagnostic laparoscopy identified all injuries. Conclusion: Thoracoscopy with SLETI and laparoscopy are feasible, safe, and accurate approaches in detecting TDI in stable patients with penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries. However, dense pleural adhesions may prevent thoracoscopy. Laparoscopy allows inspection of both hemidiaphragms and diagnoses associated intra-abdominal injuries. The choice of primary technique will depend on the individual clinical scenario.