[Shock trauma room diagnosis: initial diagnosis after blunt abdominal trauma. A review of the literature]

[Imaging techniques in modern trauma diagnostics]

Modern trauma room management requires interdisciplinary teamwork and synchronous communication between a team of anaesthesists, surgeons and radiologists. As the length of stay in the trauma room influences morbidity and mortality of a severely injured person, optimizing time is one of the main targets. With the direct involvement of modern imaging techniques the injuries caused by trauma should be detected within a very short period of time in order to enable a priority-orientated treatment. Radiology influences structure and process quality, management and development of trauma room algorithms regarding the use of imaging techniques. For the individual case interventional therapy methods can be added. Based on current data and on the Frankfurt experience the current diagnostic concepts of trauma diagnostics are presented.

[Imaging techniques in modern trauma diagnostics]

Modern trauma room management requires interdisciplinary teamwork and synchronous communication between a team of anaesthesists, surgeons and radiologists. As the length of stay in the trauma room influences morbidity and mortality of a severely injured person, optimizing time is one of the main targets. With the direct involvement of modern imaging techniques the injuries caused by trauma should be detected within a very short period of time in order to enable a priority-orientated treatment. Radiology influences structure and process quality, management and development of trauma room algorithms regarding the use of imaging techniques. For the individual case interventional therapy methods can be added. Based on current data and on the Frankfurt experience the current diagnostic concepts of trauma diagnostics are presented.

[Prehospital assessment of injury type and severity in severely injured patients by emergency physicians : An analysis of the TraumaRegister DGU®]

BACKGROUND

Prehospital assessment of injury type and severity by emergency medical services physicians impacts treatment including appropriate destination hospital selection, especially in (potentially) life-threatening cases. Injuries which are underestimated or overlooked by the emergency physician can delay adequate therapy and thus significantly influence the overall outcome. The current study used data from the TraumaRegister DGU® to evaluate the reliability of prehospital injury assessments made by emergency physicians.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data of 30,777 patients from the TraumaRegister DGU® between 1993 and 2009 were retrospectively evaluated. Using the abbreviated injury scale (AIS), subjective prehospital assessments of injury severity by emergency physicians were correlated with objectively identified injuries diagnosed after admission to hospital. For this evaluation, prehospital injury assessments rated moderate or severe by the emergency physician as well as injuries diagnosed in hospital with an AIS score ≥3 points were deemed relevant.

RESULTS

The 30,777 patients with an injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 9 suffered a total of 202,496 injuries and of these 26 % (51,839 out of 202,496) were considered relevant with an AIS ≥3 points. The most frequent relevant injuries were to the head (47 %) and chest (46 %). Of the 51,839 relevant injuries, the prehospital assessment by the emergency physician was accurate for 71 % and in 29 % of the cases relevant injuries were underestimated. Relevant injuries were unrecognized or underestimated in prehospital assessments for almost 1 out of every 7 cases of head trauma, almost 1 out of every 3 thoracic trauma and almost 1 out of every 2 abdominal and pelvic trauma.

CONCLUSION

The assessment of injury severity by emergency medical services physicians based on physical examination at the scene of the trauma is not very reliable. Thus, mechanisms of injury and overall presentation as well as identifiable injuries and vital parameters should be recognized by the emergency physician when considering treatment strategies and choice of appropriate destination hospital. The patient should be re-evaluated in a priority-oriented manner at the latest on arrival in the trauma room to avoid the consequences of unrecognized or underestimated injuries.

Combined hemorrhage/trauma models in pigs-current state and future perspectives

The majority of injury combinations in multiply injured patients entail the chest, abdomen, and extremities. Numerous pig models focus on the investigation of posttraumatic pathophysiology, organ performance monitoring and on potential treatment options. Depending on the experimental question, previous authors have included isolated insults (controlled or uncontrolled hemorrhage, chest trauma) or a combination of these injuries (hemorrhage with abdominal trauma, chest trauma, traumatic brain injury, and/or long-bone fractures). Combined trauma models in pigs can provide a high level of clinical relevance, when they are properly designed and mimicking the clinical situation. Most of these models focus on the first hours after trauma, to assess the acute sequel of traumatic hemorrhage. However, hemorrhagic shock and the associated mass transfusion are also major causes for organ failure and mortality in the later clinical course. Thus, most models lack information on the pathomechanisms during the late posttraumatic phase. Studying new therapies only during the early phase is also not reflective of the clinical situation. Therefore, a longer observation period is required to study the effects of therapeutic approaches during intensive care treatment when using animal models. These long-term studies of combined trauma models will allow the development of valuable therapeutic approaches relevant for the later posttraumatic course. This review summarizes the existing porcine models and outlines the need for long-term models to provide real effective novel therapeutics for multiply injured patients to improve organ function and clinical outcome.

[Modern imaging techniques for liver trauma]

Involvement of the liver is one of the most common injuries in addition to those of the pancreas following blunt force abdominal trauma. Due to the even now high mortality radiological imaging must provide a rapid, definitive and exact assessment of the extent of the damage. Despite conflicting study results ultrasound has become established as a rapid and relatively simple method in emergency room treatment and is irreplaceable for initial orientation diagnostics. The use of contrast medium-assisted examinations promises to be an advantage for diagnostics in the secondary phase. Due to the high sensitivity and specificity modern multidetector computed tomography is the most effective examination modality for the detection of liver damage and hepatobiliary complications and plays a central role in non-operative management following abdominal trauma. Shorter and shorter scan times even allow the examination of metastable patients and a rapid assessment even of large body volumes.

The accuracy of FAST in relation to grade of solid organ injuries: a retrospective analysis of 226 trauma patients with liver or splenic lesion

Background

This study investigated the role of a negative FAST in the diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm of multiply injured patients with liver or splenic lesions.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 226 multiply injured patients with liver or splenic lesions treated at Bern University Hospital, Switzerland.

Results

FAST failed to detect free fluid or organ lesions in 45 of 226 patients with spleen or liver injuries (sensitivity 80.1%). Overall specificity was 99.5%. The positive and negative predictive values were 99.4% and 83.3%. The overall likelihood ratios for a positive and negative FAST were 160.2 and 0.2. Grade III-V organ lesions were detected more frequently than grade I and II lesions. Without the additional diagnostic accuracy of a CT scan, the mean ISS of the FAST-false-negative patients would be significantly underestimated and 7 previously unsuspected intra-abdominal injuries would have been missed.

Conclusion

FAST is an expedient tool for the primary assessment of polytraumatized patients to rule out high grade intra-abdominal injuries. However, the low overall diagnostic sensitivity of FAST may lead to underestimated injury patterns and delayed complications may occur. Hence, in hemodynamically stable patients with abdominal trauma, an early CT scan should be considered and one must be aware of the potential shortcomings of a "negative FAST".

ATLS(R) and damage control in spine trauma

Substantial inflammatory disturbances following major trauma have been found throughout the posttraumatic course of polytraumatized patients, which was confirmed in experimental models of trauma and in vitro settings. As a consequence, the principle of damage control surgery (DCS) has developed over the last two decades and has been successfully introduced in the treatment of severely injured patients. The aim of damage control surgery and orthopaedics (DCO) is to limit additional iatrogenic trauma in the vulnerable phase following major injury. Considering traumatic brain and acute lung injury, implants for quick stabilization like external fixators as well as decided surgical approaches with minimized potential for additional surgery-related impairment of the patient's immunologic state have been developed and used widely. It is obvious, that a similar approach should be undertaken in the case of spinal trauma in the polytraumatized patient. Yet, few data on damage control spine surgery are published to so far, controlled trials are missing and spinal injury is addressed only secondarily in the broadly used ATLS(R) polytrauma algorithm. This article reviews the literature on spine trauma assessment and treatment in the polytrauma setting, gives hints on how to assess the spine trauma patient regarding to the ATLS(R) protocol and recommendations on therapeutic strategies in spinal injury in the polytraumatized patient.

Polytrauma--pathophysiology and management principles

BACKGROUND

Multiple injury results in a complex pathophysiological and immunological response. Depending on the individual injury pattern, the time elapsed after injury, and the systemic "danger response", the surgical treatment has to be modified.

OBJECTIVES

This overview provides new insights in the pathophysiology of the early danger response after polytrauma and outlines the main resulting consequences for surgical management.

RESULTS

First, synchronically to the clinical assessment, life-saving procedures need to be performed rapidly, such as control of massive intra-thoracic or abdominal bleeding and decompression of the chest and brain, as standardized by advanced trauma life support guidelines. During the second phase of "day-one-surgery" damage-control interventions such as debridement, decompression and temporary fracture stabilization are needed to avoid an excessive molecular and cellular danger response. Trauma-adjusted surgical techniques are crucial to limit the systemic response known to put remote organs at risk. In the "vulnerable phase" when the patient's defense is rather uncontrolled, only "second look" debridement to minimize a "second hit" is recommended. After stabilization of the patient as indicated by improvement of tissue oxygenation, coagulation, and decreased inflammatory mediators, "reconstructive surgery" can be applied.

CONCLUSION

Individually adjusted surgical "damage control" and "immune control" are important interactive concepts in polytrauma management.

[Developments in polytrauma management. Priority-based strategy]

The acute and early phase of polytrauma management is decisive for determining and implementing priority-based operative strategy. The patient's general condition and pattern of injury have to be considered. The highest priorities in the acute phase of operative treatment are control of mass bleeding and the release of body cavities (life-saving surgery). In the primary phase of surgical management (day 1 surgery), selected injuries are treated in the order of their urgency. Conceptual damage control surgery is distinguished from early total care. Damage control surgery should be performed only in patients meeting certain instability and risk criteria to avoid additionally burdening their condition.

[The significance of delayed diagnosis of lesions in multiply traumatised patients. A study of 1,187 shock room patients]

BACKGROUND

Multislice computed tomography (CT) technology has improved the diagnosis of relevant lesions within the phase of primary treatment of severely injured patients. The lack of time in this phase and the complexity of the multiple injuries there is still a risk that lesions will be missed at this stage. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence, causes, implications and significance when injuries are not diagnosed until later.

METHODS

The data were documented prospectively in the context of a quality management system for the care of severely injured patients in a primary urban trauma centre. Missed injuries were defined as any lesions that had not been recognised by the time the patient was admitted to the ICU.

RESULTS

During a 44-month period 1,187 (ISS 21+/-17) patients were enrolled in the study, all of whom were admitted from May 1998 to April 2002 after attending the emergency room. In total 64 (4.9%) missed injuries were detected in 58 (ISS 30+/-16) patients; 26 of the 64 missed injuries were located on the torso, 8 injuries in the head and neck region, and 30 on the arms and legs. The missed injuries were categorised as follows: 1. Lesion not seen in diagnostics (n=15). 2. Incomplete diagnostics (n=8). 3. Primarily unsuspicuous examination (n=35). 4. Diagnostics interrupted due to hemodynamic instability (n=6).

CONCLUSION

Despite intensified and standardised diagnostic procedures prescribed for use in trauma centres, injuries are still missed in severely injured patients. About 30% of lesions that are not diagnosed until after the patient has left the emergency room have clinically significant, but not lethal, consequences for the patient. Great importance attaches to the follow-up investigation on the intensive care station, so that lesions that have initially been overlooked can be diagnosed and treated as soon as possible so as to keep the complication rate low.

[Laparoscopy for abdominal trauma]

With increasing experience in minimally invasive surgery, laparoscopy's role in abdominal trauma can be defined exactly. Main exclusion criteria are hemodynamic instability and increased intracranial pressure. A literature review of 1996 to 2006 reveals perforating injury mainly of the left thoracoadominal area as the most important indication for laparoscopy . Its goal is to determine intraperitoneal lesions and integrity of the abdominal wall and diaphragm. Minor injuries of the parenchymatous organs and diaphragm can be successfully repaired laparoscopically. In blunt abdominal trauma, laparoscopy is used as a complementary diagnostic device in case ultrasound and multislice CT show unclear findings and the patient's clinical status requires invasive measures. The clear weakness of laparoscopy in abdominal trauma is its inability to identify reliably hollow viscus perforation and retroperitoneal injury. In this, sensitivity is only 25%. In case of proven lesions of the gastrointestinal tract, conversion to laparotomy is to be considered. Despite the reports on laparoscopic treatment, open repair of hollow organ injuries is still to be recommended.

Management of bleeding following major trauma: a European guideline

INTRODUCTION

Evidence-based recommendations can be made with respect to many aspects of the acute management of the bleeding trauma patient, which when implemented may lead to improved patient outcomes.

METHODS

The multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma was formed in 2005 with the aim of developing guidelines for the management of bleeding following severe injury. Recommendations were formulated using a nominal group process and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) hierarchy of evidence and were based on a systematic review of published literature.

RESULTS

Key recommendations include the following: The time elapsed between injury and operation should be minimised for patients in need of urgent surgical bleeding control, and patients presenting with haemorrhagic shock and an identified source of bleeding should undergo immediate surgical bleeding control unless initial resuscitation measures are successful. A damage control surgical approach is essential in the severely injured patient. Pelvic ring disruptions should be closed and stabilised, followed by appropriate angiographic embolisation or surgical bleeding control, including packing. Patients presenting with haemorrhagic shock and an unidentified source of bleeding should undergo immediate further assessment as appropriate using focused sonography, computed tomography, serum lactate, and/or base deficit measurements. This guideline also reviews appropriate physiological targets and suggested use and dosing of blood products, pharmacological agents, and coagulation factor replacement in the bleeding trauma patient.

CONCLUSION

A multidisciplinary approach to the management of the bleeding trauma patient will help create circumstances in which optimal care can be provided. By their very nature, these guidelines reflect the current state-of-the-art and will need to be updated and revised as important new evidence becomes available.

Moderne Diagnostik des Bauchtraumas

In case of suspected intra-abdominal injury, fast transport of the patient to a suitable hospital is of high priority. The initial clinical examination aims at identifying patients with potentially life-threatening bleeding that require emergency surgery. In patients with penetrating trauma, laparoscopy is favoured to exclude suspected perforation of the peritoneum. If a peritoneal perforation is identified, exploratory laparotomy is recommended to exclude or treat lacerations of the hollow viscus. Although clinical examination should be performed its sensitivity and specificity of up to 82% and 45%, respectively, are not sufficient as the sole screening method. For the further diagnostic workup, diagnostic peritoneal lavage has been completely replaced by abdominal ultrasound examination in Germany and many other countries. Focussing not only on the detection of free abdominal fluid but also searching for parenchymal organ lesions and performing repeated examinations increases accuracy up to 96%, with specificity of 99.8% and sensitivity of 72.1%. Computed abdominal tomography with a helical scanner with and without intravenous contrast media is currently the gold standard of imaging techniques to identify traumatic abdominal injuries. A sensitivity of 97.2% and specificity of 94.7% can be achieved. False negative findings must be expected with hollow organ injuries. Serial clinical and ultrasound examinations as well as lab testing in conjunction with repeated CT may help to identify such lesions. Increased intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) with consecutive abdominal compartment syndrome and multiple organ dysfunction is a delayed complication from conditions such as severe intra-abdominal bleeding, major bleeding from pelvic ring fractures, and profuse fluid resuscitation. The IAP should be measured routinely in patients at risk, and decompression laparotomy may be indicated with pressures of higher than 20 mmHg.

Die Beckenringzerreißung beim polytraumatisierten Patienten

Pelvic injuries represent a thorny and stubborn therapeutic challenge. Because major forces are required to fracture the pelvis, pelvic ring disruption, more than any other fracture, can lead to life-threatening associated injuries such as massive bleeding, organ injuries, and open fractures including hemipelvectomy. The rapid diagnosis and effective treatment ("damage control") of those injuries play the key role in the patient's survival, inasmuch as the mortality of multiply injured patients with pelvic ring disruption remains high with 20-35%. Exsanguinating hemorrhage represents the most dreaded acute complication of pelvic injuries. Therefore, diagnostic and therapeutic procedures have to be primarily adapted to the hemodynamics of the patient, secondarily to injuries of the brain and the torso. The time point and the techniques of definitive pelvic ring stabilization may be different in the patient with multiple injuries compared to isolated pelvic ring injuries.