Damage Control Laparotomy and Management of the Open Abdomen

Management of the open abdomen has been used for decades by general surgeons. Techniques have evolved over those decades to improve control of infection, fluid loss, and improve the ability to close the abdomen to avoid hernia formation. The authors explore the history, indications, and techniques of open abdomen management in multiple settings. The most important considerations in open abdomen management include the reason for leaving the abdomen open, prevention and mitigation of ongoing organ dysfunction, and eventual plans for abdominal closure.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Severe Abdominal Trauma: A Secondary Analysis of the Damage Control Laparotomy Trial

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following abdominal trauma. We hypothesized that patients undergoing definitive laparotomy (DEF) would have better PROs compared to those treated with damage control laparotomy (DCL).

METHODS

The DCL Trial randomized DEF versus DCL in abdominal trauma. PROs were measured using the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D) questionnaire at discharge and six months postdischarge (1 = perfect health, 0 = death, and <0 = worse than death) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist-Civilian. Unadjusted Bayesian analysis with a neutral prior was used to assess the posterior probability of achieving minimal clinically important difference.

RESULTS

Of 39 randomized patients (21 DEF versus 18 DCL), 8 patients died (7 DEF versus 1 DCL). Of those who survived, 28 completed the EQ-5D at discharge (12 DEF versus 16 DCL) and 25 at 6 mo (12 DEF versus 13 DCL). Most patients were male (79%) with a median age of 30 (interquartile range (IQR) 21-42), suffered blunt injury (56%), and were severely injured (median injury severity score 33, IQR 21 - 42). Median EQ-5D value at discharge was 0.20 (IQR 0.06 - 0.52) DEF versus 0.31 (IQR -0.03 - 0.43) DCL, and at six months 0.51 (IQR 0.30 - 0.74) DEF versus 0.50 (IQR 0.28 - 0.84) DCL. The posterior probability of minimal clinically important difference DEF versus DCL at discharge and six months was 16% and 23%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional deficits for trauma patients persist beyond the acute setting regardless of laparotomy status. These deficits warrant longitudinal studies to better inform patients on recovery expectations.

Delayed versus early hepatic resection among patients with severe traumatic liver injuries undergoing damage control laparotomy

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to assess the effect of time to hepatic resection on the outcomes of patients with high-grade liver injuries who underwent damage control laparotomy (DCL).

METHODS

This is a 4-year (2017-2020) analysis of the ACS-TQIP. Adult trauma patients with severe liver injuries (AAST-OIS grade ​≥ ​III) who underwent DCL and hepatic resection were included. We excluded patients with early mortality (<24 ​h). Patients were stratified into those who received hepatic resection within the initial operation (Early) and take-back operation (Delayed).

RESULTS

Of 914 patients identified, 29% had a delayed hepatic resection. On multivariable regression analyses, although delayed resection was not associated with mortality (aOR:1.060,95%CI[0.57-1.97],p ​= ​0.854), it was associated with higher complications (aOR:1.842,95%CI[1.38-2.46],p ​< ​0.001), and longer hospital (β: +0.129, 95%CI[0.04-0.22],p ​= ​0.005) and ICU (β:+0.198,95%CI[0.14-0.25],p ​< ​0.001) LOS, compared to the early resection.

CONCLUSION

Delayed hepatic resection was associated with higher adjusted odds of major complications and longer hospital and ICU LOS, however, no difference in mortality, compared to early resection.

The impact of hypertonic saline on damage control laparotomy after penetrating abdominal trauma

PURPOSE

The inability to achieve primary fascial closure (PFC) after emergency laparotomy increases the rates of adverse outcomes including fistula formation, incisional hernia, and intraabdominal infection. Hypertonic saline (HTS) infusion improves early PFC rates and decreases time to PFC in patients undergoing damage control laparotomy (DCL) after injury. We hypothesized that in patients undergoing DCL after penetrating abdominal injury, HTS infusion would decrease the time to fascial closure as well as the volume of crystalloid required for resuscitation without inducing clinically relevant acute kidney injury (AKI) or electrolyte derangements.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all penetrating abdominal injury patients undergoing DCL within the University of Pennsylvania Health System (January 2015-December 2018). We compared patients who received 3% HTS at 30 mL/h (HTS) to those receiving isotonic fluid (ISO) for resuscitation while the abdominal fascia remained open. Primary outcomes were the rate of early PFC (PFC within 72 h) and time to PFC; secondary outcomes included acute kidney injury, sodium derangement, ventilator-free days, hospital length of stay (LOS), and ICU LOS. Intergroup comparisons occurred by ANOVA and Tukey's comparison, and student's t, and Fischer's exact tests, as appropriate. A Shapiro-Wilk test was performed to determine normality of distribution.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients underwent DCL after penetrating abdominal injury (ISO n = 41, HTS n = 16). There were no significant intergroup differences in baseline characteristics or injury severity score. Mean time to fascial closure was significantly shorter in HTS (36.37 h ± 14.21 vs 59.05 h ± 50.75, p = 0.02), and the PFC rate was significantly higher in HTS (100% vs 73%, p = 0.01). Mean 24-h fluid and 48-h fluid totals were significantly less in HTS versus ISO (24 h: 5.2L ± 1.7 vs 8.6L ± 2.2, p = 0.01; 48 h: 1.3L ± 1.1 vs 2.6L ± 2.2, p = 0.008). During the first 72 h, peak sodium (Na) concentration (146.2 mEq/L ± 2.94 vs 142.8 mEq/L ± 3.67, p = 0.0017) as well as change in Na from ICU admission (5.1 mEq/L vs 2.3, p = 0.016) were significantly higher in HTS compared to ISO. Patients in the HTS group received significantly more blood in the trauma bay compared to ISO. There were no intergroup differences in intraoperative blood transfusion volume, AKI incidence, change in chloride concentration (△Cl) from ICU admit, Na to Cl gradient (Na:Cl), initial serum creatinine (Cr), peak post-operative Cr, change in creatinine concentration (△Cr) from ICU admission, creatinine clearance (CrCl), initial serum potassium (K), peak ICU K, change in K from ICU admission, initial pH, highest or lowest post-operative pH, mean hospital LOS, ICU LOS, and ventilator-free days.

CONCLUSIONS

HTS infusion in patients undergoing DCL after penetrating abdominal injury decreases the time to fascial closure and led to 100% early PFC. HTS infusion also decreased resuscitative fluid volume without causing significant AKI or electrolyte derangement. HTS appears to offer a safe and effective fluid management approach in patients who sustain penetrating abdominal injury and DCL to support early PFC without inducing measurable harm.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Outcomes of Abdominal Firearm Injury and Damage Control Laparotomy in the Pediatric Population

INTRODUCTION

Firearm injuries (GSW) in the pediatric population is a public health crisis. Little is known about the outcomes of damage control laparotomy (DCL) following abdominal GSW. This study aims to evaluate outcomes from abdominal GSWs in the pediatric population.

METHODS

The trauma registry from an urban Level 1 trauma was queried for pediatric (0-18 y) GSW was queried from September 2013 to June 2020. Demographics, clinical variables, outcomes, readmissions, and recidivism were analyzed.

RESULTS

Abdominal GSW were identified in 83 patients (17% of all GSW). The median age was 16 [15-17], 84% were male and 86% Black. Violent intent accounted for 90% of GSW. The injury severity score was 16 [9-26] and 80% went directly from the resuscitation bay to the operating room. Laparotomy was required in 87% of patients, and surgery was not required in any patient initially managed nonoperatively. The most common complications were intraabdominal infection (20%), other infections (13%), and small bowel obstruction (8%). DCL with temporary abdominal closure was performed in 16% of laparotomies and was associated with a longer length of stay, more infections, but similar rates of readmission and mortality. Overall mortality was 13%, with all but one patient expiring in the resuscitation bay or the operating room. All patients who underwent DCL survived to discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Abdominal firearm injuries have high morbidity and mortality in the pediatric population. Damage control operations for abdominal GSWs are a valuable surgical option with similar outcomes to primary abdominal closure after initial injury survival.

Intra-Abdominal Pressure Monitoring During Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in the Open Abdomen

INTRODUCTION

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is commonly used in open abdomen management, where there may be a simultaneous need for prevention of abdominal hypertension, tamponade of hemorrhage, and continuous fascial tension. The regional pressure dynamics of vacuum dressings are poorly understood.

METHODS

Three duroc swine underwent mid-line laparotomy and application of vacuum open abdomen dressing, with and without sponge packing. Twenty-five catheters were placed throughout the abdomen to capture and record pressures in each quadrant as the vacuum system was ranged between (-75 mmHg to -200 mmHg pressure). Vital signs and ventilator pressures were measured and recorded concomitantly.

RESULTS

No variations in ventilatory pressures or vital signs were observed with any setting. NPWT changed pressure in seven of seventy-five catheters (9%), five of which were related to abdominal packing. When data were grouped into abdominal wall, perihepatic, perisplenic, and deep abdominal regions, there was no significant change in abdominal pressure when packing was absent. With packing, only the abdominal wall region showed a pressure change, reaching a maximum of 20% of the set vacuum pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

NPWT does only little to change the intraabdominal pressure, except in superficial locations in packed abdomens and does not appear to cause hemodynamic changes in a porcine open abdomen model. While NPWT may play an important role in fluid scavenging and fascial tensioning, there are likely to be few benefits or drawbacks specifically related to negative abdominal pressure in the deep abdomen.

A novel inflatable device for perihepatic packing and hepatic hemorrhage control: A proof-of-concept study

INTRODUCTION

Uncontrolled bleeding is the primary cause of death in complex liver trauma and perihepatic packing is regularly utilized for hemorrhage control. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of a novel inflatable device (the airbag) for perihepatic packing using a validated liver injury damage control model in swine.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The image of the human liver was digitally isolated within an abdominal computerized tomography scan to produce a silicone model of the liver to mold the airbag. Two medical grade polyurethane sheets were thermal bonded to the configuration of the liver avoiding compression of the hepatic pedicle, hepatic veins, and the suprahepatic vena cava after inflation. Yorkshire pigs (n = 22) underwent controlled hemorrhagic shock (35% of the total blood volume), hypothermia, and fluid resuscitation to reproduce the indications for damage control surgery (coagulopathy, hypothermia, and acidosis) prior to a liver injury. A 3 × 10 cm rectangular segment of the left middle lobe of the liver was removed to create the injury. Subsequently, the animals were randomized into 4 groups for liver damage control (240 min), Sponge Pack (n = 6), Pressurized Airbag (n = 6), Vacuum Airbag (n = 6), and Uncontrolled (n = 4). Animals were monitored throughout the experiment and blood samples obtained.

RESULTS

Perihepatic packing with the pressurized airbag led to significantly higher mean arterial pressure during the liver damage control phase compared to sponge pack and vacuum airbag 52 mmHg (SD 2.3), 44.9 mmHg (SD 2.1), and 32 mmHg (SD 2.3), respectively (p < 0.0001), ejection fraction was also higher in that group. Hepatic hemorrhage was significantly lower in the pressurized airbag group compared to sponge pack, vacuum airbag, and uncontrolled groups; respectively 225 ml (SD 160), 611 ml (SD 123), 991 ml (SD 385), 1162 ml (SD 137) (p < 0001). Rebleeding after perihepatic packing removal was also significantly lower in the pressurized airbag group; respectively 32 ml (SD 47), 630 ml (SD 185), 513 ml (SD 303), (p = 0.0004). Intra-abdominal pressure remained similar to baseline, 1.9 mmHg (SD 1), (p = 0.297). Histopathology showed less necrosis at the border of the liver injury site with the pressurized airbag.

CONCLUSION

The pressurized airbag was significantly more effective at controlling hepatic hemorrhage and improving hemodynamics than the traditional sponge pack technique. Rebleeding after perihepatic packing removal was negligible with the pressurized airbag and it did not provoke hepatic injury.

Time is domain: factors affecting primary fascial closure after trauma and non-trauma damage control laparotomy (data from the EAST SLEEP-TIME multicenter registry)

PURPOSE

Damage control laparotomy (DCL) is used for both traumatic and non-traumatic indications. Failure to achieve primary fascial closure (PFC) in a timely fashion has been associated with complications including sepsis, fistula, and mortality. We sought to identify factors associated with time to PFC in a multicenter retrospective cohort.

METHODS

We reviewed retrospective data from 15 centers in the EAST SLEEP-TIME registry, including age, comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI]), small and large bowel resection, bowel discontinuity, vascular procedures, retained packs, number of re-laparotomies, net fluid balance after 24 h, trauma, and time to first takeback in 12-h increments to identify key factors associated with time to PFC.

RESULTS

In total, 368 patients (71.2% trauma, of which 50.6% were penetrating, median ISS 25 [16, 34], with median Apache II score 15 [11, 22] in non-trauma) were in the cohort. Of these, 92.9% of patients achieved PFC at 60.8 ± 72.0 h after 1.6 ± 1.2 re-laparotomies. Each additional re-laparotomy reduced the odds of PFC by 91.5% (95%CI 88.2-93.9%, p < 0.001). Time to first re-laparotomy was highly significant (p < 0.001) in terms of odds of achieving PFC, with no difference between 12 and 24 h to first re-laparotomy (ref), and decreases in odds of PFC of 78.4% (65.8-86.4%, p < 0.001) for first re-laparotomy after 24.1-36 h, 90.8% (84.7-94.4%, p < 0.001) for 36.1-48 h, and 98.1% (96.4-99.0%, p < 0.001) for > 48 h. Trauma patients had increased likelihood of PFC in two separate analyses (p = 0.022 and 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Time to re-laparotomy ≤ 24 h and minimizing number of re-laparotomies are highly predictive of rapid achievement of PFC in patients after trauma- and non-trauma DCL.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2B.

Dexmedetomidine and paralytic exposure after damage control laparotomy: risk factors for delirium? Results from the EAST SLEEP-TIME multicenter trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate factors associated with ICU delirium in patients who underwent damage control laparotomy (DCL), with the hypothesis that benzodiazepines and paralytic infusions would be associated with increased delirium risk. We also sought to evaluate the differences in sedation practices between trauma (T) and non-trauma (NT) patients.

METHODS

We reviewed retrospective data from 15 centers in the EAST SLEEP-TIME registry admitted from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2018. We included all adults undergoing DCL, regardless of diagnosis, who had completed daily Richmond Agitation Sedation Score (RASS) and Confusion Assessment Method-ICU (CAM-ICU). We excluded patients younger than 18 years, pregnant women, prisoners and patients who died before the first re-laparotomy. Data collected included age, number of re-laparotomies after DCL, duration of paralytic infusion, duration and type of sedative and opioid infusions as well as daily CAM-ICU and RASS scores to analyze risk factors associated with the proportion of delirium-free/coma-free ICU days during the first 30 days (DF/CF-ICU-30) using multivariate linear regression.

RESULTS

A 353 patient subset (73.2% trauma) from the overall 567-patient cohort had complete daily RASS and CAM-ICU data. NT patients were older (58.9 ± 16.0 years vs 40.5 ± 17.0 years [p < 0.001]). Mean DF/CF-ICU-30 days was 73.7 ± 96.4% for the NT and 51.3 ± 38.7% in the T patients (p = 0.030). More T patients were exposed to Midazolam, 41.3% vs 20.3% (p = 0.002). More T patients were exposed to Propofol, 91.0% vs 71.9% (p < 0.001) with longer infusion times in T compared to NT (71.2 ± 85.9 vs 48.9 ± 69.8 h [p = 0.017]). Paralytic infusions were also used more in T compared to NT, 34.8% vs 18.2% (p < 0.001). Using linear regression, dexmedetomidine infusion and paralytic infusions were associated with decreases in DF/CF-ICU-30, (- 2.78 (95%CI [- 5.54, - 0.024], p = 0.040) and (- 7.08 ([- 13.0, - 1.10], p = 0.020) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the relationship between paralytic use and delirium is well-established, the observation that dexmedetomidine exposure is independently associated with increased delirium and coma is novel and bears further study.

Variation in use of damage control laparotomy for trauma by trauma centers in the United States, Canada, and Australasia

Background

It is unknown how frequently damage control (DC) laparotomy is used across trauma centers in different countries. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of trauma centers in the United States, Canada, and Australasia to study variations in use of the procedure and predictors of more frequent use of DC laparotomy.

Methods

A self-administered, electronic, cross-sectional survey of trauma centers in the United States, Canada, and Australasia was conducted. The survey collected information about trauma center and program characteristics. It also asked how often the trauma program director estimated DC laparotomy was performed on injured patients at that center on average over the last year. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of a higher reported frequency of use of DC laparotomy.

Results

Of the 366 potentially eligible trauma centers sent the survey, 199 (51.8%) trauma program directors or leaders responded [United States = 156 (78.4%), Canada = 26 (13.1%), and Australasia = 17 (8.5%)]. The reported frequency of use of DC laparotomy was highly variable across trauma centers. DC laparotomy was used more frequently in level-1 than level-2 or -3 trauma centers. Further, high-volume level-1 centers used DC laparotomy significantly more often than lower volume level-1 centers (p = 0.02). Nearly half (48.4%) of high-volume volume level-1 trauma centers reported using the procedure at least once weekly. Significant adjusted predictors of more frequent use of DC laparotomy included country of origin [odds ratio (OR) for the United States vs. Canada = 7.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39–40.27], level-1 verification status (OR = 6.02; 95% CI 2.01–18.06), and the assessment of a higher number of severely injured (Injury Severity Scale score > 15) patients (OR per-100 patients = 1.62; 95% CI 1.20–2.18) and patients with penetrating injuries (OR per-5% increase = 1.27; 95% CI 1.01–1.58) in the last year.

Conclusions

The reported frequency of use of DC laparotomy was highly variable across trauma centers. Those centers that most need to evaluate the benefit-to-risk ratio of using DC laparotomy in different scenarios may include high-volume, level-1 trauma centers, particularly those that often manage penetrating injuries.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13017-021-00396-7.

The results of rapid source control laparotomy or open abdomen for acute diverticulitis

INTRODUCTION

Rapid source control laparotomy (RSCL) for the management of non-traumatic intra-abdominal emergencies has increased over the past 25 years when it was advocated for trauma patients. Little data, however, support its widespread use. We hypothesize that the patients with RSCL will have poorer outcomes than those treated with primary fascial closure (PFC).

METHODS

Patients operated for acute diverticulitis from 2014 to 2016 using The American College of Surgeons sponsored National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data were reviewed. Two groups were identified: PFC, patients with their closed fascia but skin left open (PFC) and RSCL, patients with their left open fascia after the initial operation. The primary outcome of the study was 30-day mortality, with secondary analyses evaluating complications, discharge location and length of stay. Univariate analysis was initially performed followed by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

A total of 460 patients were surgically treated for Hinchey IV diverticulitis of whom 101 (21.9%) had RSCL. The length of stay of the RSCL patients was significantly longer (15 versus 12 days, p, 0.02) than patients in the PFC group. Similarly, the discharge destination for the PFC group was twice as likely to be discharged home as the RSCL group.

CONCLUSION

RSCL for acute diverticulitis is a widely used but is associated with prolonged hospitalizations resulting in high rates of discharge to skilled nursing or rehabilitation facilities. Its routine use for diverticulitis should be limited.

Age Is But a Number: Damage Control Surgery Outcomes in Geriatric Emergency General Surgery

BACKGROUND

Damage control surgery (DCS) with temporary abdominal closure (TAC) is increasingly utilized in emergency general surgery (EGS). As the population ages, more geriatric patients (GP) are undergoing EGS operations. Concern exists for GP's ability to tolerate DCS. We hypothesize that DCS in GP does not increase morbidity or mortality and has similar rates of primary closure compared to non-geriatric patients (NGP).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review from 2014-2020 was conducted on all non-trauma EGS patients who underwent DCS with TAC. Demographics, admission lab values, fluid amounts, length of stay (LOS), timing of closure, post-operative complications and mortality were collected. GP were compared to NGP and results were analyzed using Chi square and Wilcox signed rank test.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients (n = 50, <65 y; n = 48, ≥65 y) met inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in median number of operations (3 versus 2), time to primary closure (2.5 versus 3 d), hospital LOS (19 versus 17.5 d), ICU LOS (11 versus 8 d), rate of primary closure (66% versus 56%), post op ileus (44% versus 48%), abscess (14% versus 10%), need for surgery after closure (32% versus 19%), anastomotic dehiscence (16% versus 6%), or mortality (34% versus 42%). Average time until take back after index procedure did not vary significantly between young and elderly group (45.8 versus 38.5 h; P = 0.89). GP were more likely to have hypertension (83% versus 50%; P ≤ 0.05), atrial fibrillation (25% versus 4%; P ≤ 0.05) and lower median heart rate compared to NGP (90 versus 103; P ≤ 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

DCS with TAC in geriatric EGS patients achieves similar outcomes and mortality to younger patients. Indication, not age, should factor into the decision to perform DCS.

Is the "Death Triad" a Casualty of Modern Damage Control Resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Principles of damage control laparotomy (DCL) focus on early surgical control of hemorrhage and contamination in addition to damage control resuscitation (DCR) to combat the significant mortality associated with the "death triad" of hypothermia, acidosis, and coagulopathy. We hypothesized that DCL patients managed with DCR would have lower mortality from the death triad than historical studies.

METHODS

A 5-y retrospective chart review of all consecutive adult trauma patients presenting to a Level I trauma center who underwent DCL was conducted. Parameters associated with the death triad were evaluated on admission and 24 h after the presentation. Kaplan Meier survival plots were used to compare the components of the death triad. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 149 adult patients were identified. The overall incidence of death triad was 20.8% (n = 31/149). 24-h mortality for all patients was 5.4% (n = 8/149). Kaplan Meier plots showed that 24-h mortality was significantly increased if 3/3 components of the death triad were present (P < 0.05). At 24-h after admission, mortality occurred in 16.6% (n = 5/30) of patients with the death triad.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that the 24-h mortality of trauma patients increased with the addition of all three death triad components. The death triad predicted death in 16.6% of patients treated with DCL and DCR at 24 h. Results suggest that the death triad might not be as applicable in the modern era of DCL in combination with DCR. Other factors contributing to in-hospital mortality need to be further elucidated.

More medications, more problems: results from the Sedation Level after Emergent Exlap with Packing for TRAUMA (SLEEP-TRAUMA) study

Purpose

Sedation management of trauma patients after damage control laparotomy (DCL) has not been optimized. We evaluated if shorter sedation exposure was associated with increased proportion of delirium-free/coma-free (DF/CF-ICU) days and change in time to definitive fascial closure (DFC).

Methods

We reviewed trauma DCL patients at an ACS-verified level I center over 5 years as shorter (SE) or longer than median (LE) sedation exposure. We compared demographics, injury patterns, hemodynamic parameters, and injury severity between groups. We calculated the propensity for each patient to achieve DFC using age, gender, ISS, red blood cell transfusion, bowel discontinuity, abdominal vascular injury, and time to first takeback; we then determined the effect of sedation exposure on rate of DFC by multivariate Cox regression, adjusted for propensity to achieve DFC. We used linear regression adjusted for age, ISS, head-AIS, bowel discontinuity, and vascular injury to determine the effect of sedation exposure on the proportion of DF/CF-ICU days.

Results

65 patients (33.8% penetrating) had mean age 41.8 ± 16.0, ISS 27.1 ± 14.2, Head-AIS 1.2 ± 1.6 and median sedation exposure of 2.2 [IQR 0.78, 7.3] days (35 SE and 30 LE). Pattern and severity of solid organ injuries and proportion of small and large bowel and vascular injuries were similar between groups. LE had more abdominal sepsis (23.3% vs 0%, p = 0.003) and enterocutaneous fistula (16.7% vs 0%, p = 0.016), and more ventilator (17.3 ± 12.7 vs 6.1 ± 6.8, p < 0.001), ICU (20.8 ± 14.2 vs 7.2 ± 7.6, p < 0.001), and hospital days (29.6 ± 19.6 vs 13.9 ± 9.0, p < 0.001). DFC was achieved more rapidly in the SE group (2.0 ± 1.5 days vs 3.9 ± 3.7 days [unadjusted], p = 0.023) and SE had a higher proportion of unadjusted DF/CF-ICU days (33.0 ± 32.0% vs 18.1 ± 16.4%, p = 0.020).

SE was associated with an increased proportion of adjusted DF/CF-ICU days by multivariate linear regression (13.1% [95% CI 1.4–24.8%], p = 0.029) and with faster adjusted rate of DFC by multivariate Cox regression (RR 2.28 [95% CI 1.25–4.15, p = 0.007]).

Conclusions

Shorter sedation exposure is associated with increased proportion of DF/CF-ICU days and more rapid DFC after DCL for trauma.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00068-020-01524-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Readmission With Major Abdominal Complications After Penetrating Abdominal Trauma

BACKGROUND

Despite improvements in operative techniques, major abdominal complications (MACs) continue to occur after penetrating abdominal trauma (PAT). This study aimed to evaluate the burden of MAC after PAT.

METHODS

The (2012-2015) National Readmission Database was queried for all adult (age ≥18 y) trauma patients with penetrating injuries who underwent exploratory laparotomy and were readmitted within 6 mo of index hospitalization discharge. Patients were stratified by firearm injuries (FIs) and stab injuries (SIs). Primary outcomes were rates of MAC: intra-abdominal abscesses (IAAs), superficial surgical site infection (SSI), and fascial dehiscence within 6 mo after discharge. Secondary outcomes were both nonabdominal complications and mortality, postdischarge, and 6-mo readmission. Regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 4473 patients (FI, 2326; SI, 2147) were included in the study; the mean age was 32 ± 14 y, the Injury Severity Score was 19 (15-25), and 23% underwent damage control laparotomy (DCL). The rate of MAC within 6 mo was 22% (IAA 19%, SSI 7%, and fascial dehiscence 4%). Patients with FIs had a higher rate of IAA (27% versus 10%; P < 0.01), SSI (11% versus 3%; P < 0.01), fascial dehiscence (5% versus 3%; P = 0.03), nonabdominal complications (54% versus 24%; P < 0.01), and postdischarge mortality (8% versus 6%; P < 0.01) compared with patients with SIs . On regression analysis, DCL (P < 0.01), large bowel perforation (P < 0.01), biliary-pancreatic injury (P < 0.01), hepatic injury (P < 0.01), and blood transfusion (P = 0.02) were predictors of MAC.

CONCLUSIONS

MAC developed in one in five patients after PAT. FIs have a higher potential for hollow viscus injury and peritoneal contamination, and are more predictive of MAC and nonabdominal complications, especially after DCL.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III Prognostic.

Damage Control Laparotomy: High-Volume Centers Display Similar Mortality Rates Despite Differences in Country Income Level

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive analysis of trauma care between high-, middle-, and low-income countries (HIC/MIC/LIC) is needed to improve global health. Comparison of HIC and MIC outcomes after damage control laparotomy (DCL) for patients is unknown. We evaluated DCL utilization among patients treated at high-volume trauma centers in the USA and South Africa, an MIC, hypothesizing similar mortality outcomes despite differences in resources and setting.

METHODS

Post hoc analysis of prospectively collected trauma databases from participating centers was performed. Injury severity, physiologic, operative data and post-operative outcomes were abstracted. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to assess differences between HIC/MIC for the primary outcome of mortality.

RESULTS

There were 967 HIC and 602 MIC patients who underwent laparotomy. DCL occurred in 144 MIC patients (25%) and 241 HIC (24%) patients. Most sustained (58%) penetrating trauma with higher rates in the MIC compared to the HIC (71 vs. 32%, p = 0.001). Between groups, no differences were found for admission physiology, coagulopathy, or markers of shock except for increased presence of hypotension among patients in the HIC. Crystalloid infusion volumes were greater among MIC patients, and MIC patients received fewer blood products than those in the HIC. Overall mortality was 30% with similar rates between groups (29 in HIC vs. 33% in MIC, p = 0.4). On regression, base excess and penetrating injury were independent predictors of mortality but not patient residential status.

CONCLUSION

Use and survival of DCL for patients with severe abdominal trauma was similar between trauma centers in HIC and MIC settings despite increased penetrating trauma and less transfusion in the MIC center. While the results overall suggest no gap in care for patients requiring DCL in this MIC, it highlights improvements that can be made in damage control resuscitation.

Effectiveness and safety of continuous neuromuscular blockade in trauma patients with an open abdomen: A follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) have been associated with decreased time to fascial closure following damage control laparotomy (DCL). Changes in resuscitation over the last decade bring this practice into question.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of adults who underwent DCL between 2009 and 2015 was conducted at an ACS-verified level 1 trauma center. The study group (NMBA+) received continuous NMBA within 24 h of DCL. Data collected included demographics, resuscitative fluids, mortality, and complications. The primary outcome was time to fascial closure. Factors associated with abdominal closure were determined by ordinal logistic regression.

RESULTS

There were 222 patients included (NMBA+ 125; NMBA- 97). Demographics were similar, including median age (NMBA+ 36; NMBA- 39 years) and ISS (NMBA+ 29; NMBA- 34). There was no difference in median time to closure (NMBA+ 2; NMBA- 2 days) or the incidence of complications (NMBA+ 64%; NMBA- 59%). In a regression model, NMBA exposure was not associated with time to abdominal closure.

CONCLUSIONS

In adult trauma patients requiring DCL, continuous NMBA did not affect the time to abdominal closure.

Incidence and factors associated with development of heterotopic ossification after damage control laparotomy

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of heterotopic ossification (HO) following damage control laparotomy (DCL) is unknown. Abdominal wall reconstruction may prove more challenging in patients with HO. This study examines the incidence and factors associated with HO in patients with an open abdomen following DCL.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients with an open abdomen after DCL at a level 1 trauma centre from 2009 to 2015 was conducted. Demographics and peri-operative outcomes of patients with and without HO were compared. Univariate and multivariable binary logistic regression models were used to determine the association of peri-operative factors with the development of HO.

RESULTS

68 patients were included, of which 36 (53%) developed HO. On univariate analysis, development of HO was significantly associated with hollow viscus injury (OR, 3.89; CI 1.42-10.7), greater number of abdominal surgeries prior to definitive closure (OR, 1.84; CI, 1.10-3.05), non-fascial closure (OR, 4.33; CI, 1.44-13.1) and higher peak ALP (OR 1.01; CI, 1.00-1.02). The presence of a hollow viscus injury remained an independent predictor of HO on multivariable analysis after adjusting for covariates (OR, 3.77; CI, 1.22-11.6).

CONCLUSION

Heterotopic ossification develops in a high proportion of trauma patients following damage control laparotomy, particularly in the presence of hollow viscus injury. Its impact on delayed abdominal wall reconstruction and the efficacy of prophylaxis strategies merit further investigation.

The effect of damage control laparotomy on major abdominal complications: A matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

Damage control laparotomy (DCL) for trauma is thought to be associated with increased abdominal complications. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of DCL on abdominal complications by comparing two groups of trauma patients: DCL patients who were prospectively adjudicated to potentially being closed at the primary laparotomy (potential DEF or pDEF) and those who underwent definitive laparotomy (DEF).

METHODS

The pDEF group was matched to DEF patients according to mechanism of injury, abdominal injury severity, operating room transfusions, and performance of a colon resection. The primary outcome was major abdominal complications (MAC), a composite variable.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference in the primary outcome, major abdominal complications, were seen (pDEF 19% versus DEF 56%, p = 0.066). The pDEF group was more likely to have a fascial dehiscence (38% versus 0%, p = 0.018), and to be re-opened after fascial closure (38% versus 0%, p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Damage control laparotomy was associated with clinically but not statistically significant increase in rates of MAC. Increased numbers of patients to analyze in this fashion is needed.

General surgeon management of complex hepatopancreatobiliary trauma at a level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

The impact of general surgeons (GS) taking trauma call on patient outcomes has been debated. Complex hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) injuries present a particular challenge and often require specialized care. We predicted no difference in the initial management or outcomes of complex HPB trauma between GS and trauma/critical care (TCC) specialists.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who underwent operative intervention for complex HPB trauma from 2008 to 2015 at an ACS-verified level I trauma center was performed. Chart review was used to obtain variables pertaining to demographics, clinical presentation, operative management, and outcomes. Patients were grouped according to whether their index operation was performed by a GS or TCC provider and compared.

RESULTS

180 patients met inclusion criteria. The GS (n = 43) and TCC (n = 137) cohorts had comparable patient demographics and clinical presentations. Most injuries were hepatic (73.3% GS versus 72.6% TCC) and TCC treated more pancreas injuries (15.3% versus GS 13.3%; P = 0.914). No significant differences were found in HPB-directed interventions at the initial operation (41.9% GS versus 56.2% TCC; P = 0.100), damage control laparotomy with temporary abdominal closure (69.8% versus 69.3%; P = 0.861), LOS, septic complications or 30-day mortality (13.9% versus 10.2%; P = 0.497). TCC were more likely to place an intraabdominal drain than GS (52.6% versus 34.9%; P = 0.043).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no significant differences between GS and TCC specialists in initial operative management or clinical outcomes of complex HPB trauma. The frequent and proper use of damage control laparotomy likely contribute to these findings.

Intra-abdominal packing with laparotomy pads and QuikClot™ during damage control laparotomy: A safety analysis

BACKGROUND

Intra-abdominal packing with laparotomy pads (LP) is a common and rapid method for hemorrhage control in critically injured patients. Combat Gauze™ and Trauma Pads™ ([QC] Z-Medica QuikClot^®) are kaolin impregnated hemostatic agents, that in addition to LP, may improve hemorrhage control. While QC packing has been effective in a swine liver injury model, QC remains unstudied for human intra-abdominal use. We hypothesized QC packing during damage control laparotomy (DCL) better controls hemorrhage than standard packing and is safe for intracorporeal use.

METHODS

A retrospective review (2011-2014) at a Level-I Trauma Center reviewed all patients who underwent DCL with intentionally retained packing. Clinical characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative parameters, and outcomes were compared with respect to packing (LP vs. LP+QC). All complications occurring within the patients' hospital stays were reviewed. A p≤0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

68 patients underwent DCL with packing; (LP n=40; LP+QC n=28). No difference in age, BMI, injury mechanism, ISS, or GCS was detected (Table 1, all p>0.05). LP+QC patients had a lower systolic blood pressure upon ED presentation and greater blood loss during index laparotomy than LP patients. LP+QC patients received more packed red blood cell and fresh frozen plasma resuscitation during index laparotomy (both p<0.05). Despite greater physiologic derangement in the LP+QC group, there was no difference in total blood products required after index laparotomy until abdominal closure (LP vs LP+QC; p>0.05). After a median of 2days until abdominal closure in both groups, no difference in complications rates attributable to intra-abdominal packing (LP vs LP+QC) was detected.

CONCLUSION

While the addition of QC to LP packing did not confer additional benefit to standard packing, there was no additional morbidity identified with its use. The surgeons at our institution now select augmented packing with QC for sicker patients, as we believe this may have additional advantage over standard LP packing. A randomized controlled trial is warranted to further evaluate the intra-abdominal use of advanced hemostatic agents, like QC, for both hemostasis and associated morbidity.

Management and closure of the open abdomen after damage control laparotomy for trauma. A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Damage control laparotomy for trauma (DCL) entails immediate control of haemorrhage and contamination, temporary abdominal closure (TAC), a period of physiological stabilisation, then definitive repair of injuries. Although immediate primary fascial closure is desired, fascial retraction and visceral oedema may dictate an alternate approach. Our objectives were to systematically identify and compare methods for restoration of fascial continuity when primary closure is not possible following DCL for trauma, to simplify these into a standardised map, and describe the ideal measures of process and outcome for future studies.

METHODS

Cochrane, OVID (Medline, AMED, Embase, HMIC) and PubMed databases were accessed using terms: (traum*, damage control, abbreviated laparotomy, component separation, fascial traction, mesh closure, planned ventral hernia (PVH), and topical negative pressure (TNP)). Randomised Controlled Trials, Case Series and Cohort Studies reporting TAC and early definitive closure methods in trauma patients undergoing DCL were included. Outcomes were mortality, days to fascial closure, hospital length of stay, abdominal complications and delayed ventral herniation.

RESULTS

26 studies described and compared early definitive closure methods; delayed primary closure (DPC), component separation (CS) and mesh repair (MR), among patients with an open abdomen after DCL for trauma. A three phase map was developed to describe the temporal and sequential attributes of each technique. Significant heterogeneity in nomenclature, terminology, and reporting of outcomes was identified. Estimates for abdominal complications in DPC, MR and CS groups were 17%, 41% and 17% respectively, while estimates for mortality in DPC and MR groups were 6% and 0.5% (data heterogeneity and requirement of fixed and random effects models prevented significance assessment). Estimates for abdominal closure in the MR and DPC groups differed; 6.30 (95% CI=5.10-7.51), and 15.90 (95% CI=9.22-22.58) days respectively. Reporting poverty prevented subgroup estimate generation for ventral hernia and hospital length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Component separation or mesh repair may be valid alternatives to delayed primary closure following a trauma DCL. Comparisons were hampered by the lack of uniform reporting and bias. We propose a new system of standardised nomenclature and reporting for further investigation and management of the post-DCL open abdomen.

Planned ventral hernia following damage control laparotomy in trauma: an added year of recovery but equal long-term outcome

PURPOSE

Significantly injured trauma patients commonly require damage control laparotomy (DCL). These patients undergo either primary fascial closure during the index hospitalization or are discharged with a planned ventral hernia. Hospital and long-term outcomes of these patients have not been extensively studied.

METHODS

Patients who underwent DCL for trauma from 2003 to 2012 at a regional Level I trauma center were identified and a comparison was made between those who had primary fascial closure and planned ventral hernia.

RESULTS

DCL was performed in 154 patients, 47% of whom sustained penetrating injuries. The mean age and injury severity score (ISS) were 40 and 25, respectively. Hospital mortality was 19%. Primary fascial closure was performed in 115 (75%) of those undergoing DCL during the index hospitalization. Of these, 11 (9%) had reopening of the fascia. Of the surviving patients, 22 (19%) never had primary fascial closure and were discharged with a planned ventral hernia. Patients with primary fascial closure and those with planned ventral hernia were similar in age, gender, ISS, and mechanism. Those with planned ventral hernias underwent more subsequent laparotomies (3.0 vs. 1.3, p < 0.001), and had more enteric fistulas (18.2 vs. 4.3%, p = 0.041) and intra-abdominal infections (46 vs. 15%, p = 0.007), and had a greater number of hospital days (38 vs. 25, p = 0.007) during the index hospitalization. Sixteen (73%) patients with a planned ventral hernia had definitive reconstruction (mean days = 266). Once definitive abdominal wall closure was achieved, the two groups achieved similar rates of return to work and usual activity (71 vs. 70%, p = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Following DCL for trauma, patients with a planned ventral hernia have definitive reconstruction nearly 9 months after the initial injury. Once definitive abdominal wall closure has been achieved; patients with primary fascial closure and those with planned ventral hernia have similar rates of return to usual activity.

Damage control laparotomy and delayed pancreatoduodenectomy for complex combined pancreatoduodenal and venous injuries

BACKGROUND

This single-centre study evaluated the efficacy of damage control surgery and delayed pancreatoduodenectomy and reconstruction in patients who had combined severe pancreatic head and visceral venous injuries.

METHODS

Prospectively recorded data of patients who underwent an initial damage control laparotomy and a subsequent pancreatoduodenectomy for severe pancreatic injuries were evaluated to assess optimal operative sequencing.

RESULTS

During the 20-year study period, 312 patients were treated for pancreatic injuries of whom 14 underwent a pancreatoduodenectomy. Six (five men, one woman, median age 20, range 16-39 years) of the 14 patients were in extremis with exsanguinating venous bleeding and non-reconstructable AAST grade 5 pancreatoduodenal injuries and underwent a damage control laparotomy followed by delayed pancreatoduodenectomy and reconstruction when stable. During the initial DCS, the blood loss compared to the subsequent laparotomy and definitive procedure was 5456 ml, range 2318-7665 vs 1250 ml, range 850-3600 ml (p < 0.01). The mean total fluid administered in the operating room was 11,150 ml, range 8450-13,320 vs 6850 ml, range 3350-9020 ml (p < 0.01). The mean operating room time was 113 min, range 90-140 vs 335 min, range 260-395 min (p < 0.01). During the second laparotomy five patients had a pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy and one a standard Whipple resection. Four of the six patients survived. Two patients died in hospital, one of MOF and coagulopathy and the other of intra-abdominal sepsis and multi-organ failure. Median duration of intensive care was 6 days, (range 1-20 days) and median duration of hospital stay was 29 days, (range 1-94 days).

CONCLUSION

Damage control laparotomy and delayed secondary pancreatoduodenectomy is a live-saving procedure in the small cohort of patients who have dire pancreatic and vascular injuries. When used appropriately, the staged resection and reconstruction allows survival in a previously unsalvageable group of patients who have severe physiological derangement.

Planned re-laparotomy and the need for optimization of physiology and immunology

Planned re-laparotomy or damage control laparotomy (DCL), first described by Dr. Harlan Stone in 1983, has become a widely utilized technique in a broad range of patients and operative situations. Studies have validated the use of DCL by demonstrating decreased mortality and morbidity in trauma, general surgery and abdominal vascular catastrophes. Indications for planned re-laparotomy include severe physiologic derangements, coagulopathy, concern for bowel ischemia, and abdominal compartment syndrome. The immunology of DCL patients is not well described in humans, but promising animal studies suggest a benefit from the open abdomen (OA) and several human trials on this subject are currently underway. Optimal critical care of patients with OA's, including sedation, paralysis, nutrition, antimicrobial and fluid management strategies have been associated with improved closure rates and recovery.

Surgical management and outcome of blunt major liver injuries: experience of damage control laparotomy with perihepatic packing in one trauma centre

INTRODUCTION

This retrospective study aimed to assess the clinical experience and outcome of damage control laparotomy with perihepatic packing in the management of blunt major liver injuries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 1998 to December 2006, 58 patients of blunt major liver injury, American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-Organ Injury Scale (AAST-OIS) equal or greater than III, were operated with perihepatic packing at our institute. Demographic data, intra-operative findings, operative procedures, adjunctive managements and outcome were reviewed. To determine whether there was statistical difference between the survivor and non-survivor groups, data were compared by using Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables, either Pearson's chi-square test or with Yates continuity correction for contingency tables, and results were considered statistically significant if p<0.05.

RESULTS

Of the 58 patients, 20 (35%) were classified as AAST-OIS grade III, 24 (41%) as grade IV, and 14 (24%) as grade V. At laparotomy, depending on the severity of injuries, all 58 patients underwent various liver-related procedures and perihepatic packing. The more frequent liver-related procedures included debridement hepatectomy (n=21), hepatorrhaphy (n=19), selective hepatic artery ligation (n=11) and 7 patients required post-laparotomy hepatic transarterial embolization. Of the 58 patients, 28 survived and 30 died with a 52% mortality rate. Of the 30 deaths, uncontrolled liver bleeding in 24-h caused 25 deaths and delayed sepsis caused residual 5 deaths. The mortality rate versus OIS was grade III: 30% (6/20), grade IV: 54% (13/24), and grade V: 79% (11/14), respectively. On univariate analysis, the significant predictors of mortality were OIS grade (p=0.019), prolonged initial prothrombin time (PT) (p=0.004), active partial thromboplastin time (APTT) (p<0.0001) and decreased platelet count (p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality rate of surgical blunt major liver injuries remains high even with perihepatic packing. Since prolonged initial PT, APTT and decreased platelet count were associated with high risk of mortality, we advocate combination of damage control resuscitation with damage control laparotomy in these major liver injuries.

Primary fascial closure after damage control laparotomy: sepsis vs haemorrhage

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of patients undergoing damage control laparotomy (DCL) for intra-abdominal sepsis vs intra abdominal haemorrhage. We hypothesize that patients undergoing DCL for sepsis will have a higher rate of septic complications and a lower rate of primary fascial closure.

SETTINGS AND PATIENTS

Retrospective study of patients undergoing DCL from December 2006 to November 2009. Data are presented as medians and percentages where appropriate.

RESULTS

111 patients were identified (55 men), 79 with sepsis and 32 with haemorrhage. There was no difference in age (63 vs 62 years), body mass index (BMI, 27 vs 28), diabetes mellitus (13% vs 9%), or duration of initial operation (125 vs 117 min). Patients with sepsis presented with a lower serum lactate (2.2 vs 4.7 mmol/L, p<0.01), base deficit (4.0 vs 8.0, p ≤ 0.01) and ASA score (3.0 vs 4.0, p<0.01). There was no statistical difference in overall morbidity (81% vs 66), mortality (19% vs 22%), intra-abdominal abscess (18% vs 16%), deep wound infection (9% vs 9%), enterocutaneous fistula (ECF) (8% vs 6%) and primary fascial closure (58% vs 59%). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that intra-abdominal abscess (OR 4.26, 95% CI 1.06-19.32), higher base deficit (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00-1.31) and more abdominal explorations (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.23-2.07) were associated with lack of primary fascial closure, but BMI (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94-1.07), ECF (OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.23-19.98), wound infection (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.15-5.27), amount of crystalloids infused within the first 24h (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.00) and intra-abdominal sepsis (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.35-3.80) were not.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an equivalent rate of septic complications and primary fascial closure rates regardless of cause for DCL. Intra-abdominal abscess, worse base deficit and higher number of abdominal explorations were independently associated with the lack of primary fascial closure.

Nutritional support in patients following damage control laparotomy with an open abdomen

INTRODUCTION

Damage control laparotomy (DCL) and the open abdomen have been well accepted following either severe abdominal trauma or emergency surgical disease. As DCL is increasingly utilized as a therapeutic option, appropriate management of the post-DCL patient is important. Early caloric support by enteral nutrition (EN) in the critically ill patient improves wound healing and decreases septic complications, lung injury, and multi-system organ failure. However, following DCL, nutritional strategies can be challenging and, at times, even daunting.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though limited data exist, the use of early EN following DCL seems safe, provided that the patient is not undergoing active resuscitation or the bowel is not in discontinuity. It is unknown as to whether EN in the open abdomen reduces septic complications, prevents enterocutaneous fistula (ECF), or alters the timing of definitive abdominal wall closure. Future investigation in a prospective manner may help elucidate these important questions.