Surgical Trends in the Management of Duodenal Injury

Trends in Duodenal Injury Severity, Repair, and Mortality Over Time

INTRODUCTION

Outcomes for patients with traumatic duodenal injury are determined by the location of the injury, injury severity, and associated injuries. We hypothesized that there is an association among the increased frequency of firearm injuries, the severity of duodenal injuries, trends in repair techniques, and mortality.

METHODS

Duodenal injuries managed at an adult level 1 hospital from 2000 to 2022 were identified. Demographics, injury type, the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grade, type of surgical repair, and mortality data were obtained and aggregated into two periods (2000 to June 2011 and July 2011 to 2022) to evaluate trends over time. P values < 0.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty eight cases were identified. Duodenal injuries due to firearms increased over time (30% versus 55%, P < 0.001). The distribution of AAST injury grade shifted over time with fewer grade 1 and more grade 2 to 4 injuries in the later period (P = 0.002). AAST grade 2 injuries or higher were more likely due to firearms (P < 0.001). Despite more high-grade injuries, there was no change in the use of primary repair with or without tube drainage (61% versus 70%, P = 0.35) and there was no change in mortality (15% versus 17%, P value 0.62) between the time periods.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a proportional increase in the number of duodenal injuries caused by firearms. Higher grade duodenal injuries were more common with firearm injuries and were predominately repaired with simple techniques with no increase in mortality.

Pancreas-sparing partial duodenectomy as an alternative to emergency pancreaticoduodenectomy for a major duodenal perforation: a case report

A 71-year-old woman underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection for early duodenal cancer at the second portion of the duodenum and developed acute peritonitis due to delayed duodenal perforation. Emergency laparotomy was performed. A huge perforation formed at the descending duodenum without ampulla involvement. Pancreas-sparing partial duodenectomy (PPD) with gastrojejunostomy was performed (250 min operative time) with 50 mL of intraoperative blood loss. She required intensive care for 3 days and was discharged on postoperative day 21 with no severe complications. Emergency treatment for a major duodenal injury or perforation remains challenging because of high morbidity and mortality. An appropriate treatment should be considered according to the nature of the defect. Although PPD is an acceptable procedure for patients with a duodenal neoplasm, its use in emergency surgery is rarely reported. PPD is more reliable than primary repair or anastomosis using a jejunal wall, and less invasive than pancreaticoduodenectomy, for emergency treatment. We performed PPD in this patient because the duodenal perforation was too large to reconstruct and did not involve the ampulla. PPD can be a safe and feasible alternative surgical procedure to pancreaticoduodenectomy for a major duodenal perforation, especially in patients with a duodenal perforation that does not involve the ampulla.

Surgical management of duodenal injury: experience from 92 cases

PURPOSE

Duodenal injury increases with traffic accidents, and delayed diagnosis or inappropriate operation increase mortality and complications. This study aimed to explore early recognition and timely surgical intervention.

METHODS

All patients with duodenal injuries treated operatively during the past 10 years were reviewed, and the data were analyzed retrospectively regarding the mechanism of injury, diagnostic and therapeutic methods, and outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 92 patients with duodenal injuries accounted for 7.3% of 1258 patients with abdominal injury. Of the 92 patients, 71 (77.17%) experienced blunt trauma, with traffic accidents accounting for 59.2% (42/71). In 35 patients, a preoperative diagnosis was obtained by reviewing abdominal signs, peritoneocentesis, and imaging. The remaining 57 patients underwent urgent laparotomy, through which a definitive diagnosis of duodenal injury was confirmed during the operation. In all 92 patients, the surgical procedures involved simple sutures; pedicled jejunal piece coverings; and various anastomoses following resection of the injured duodenal portion, including the Whipple procedure and damage-control surgery principles. The overall mortality rate was 12.0% (11/92) with deaths mainly occurring due to associated injuries. When excluding 2 cases of intraoperative death, there were 47 cases in the double-tube gastrostomy group and 43 cases in the traditional triple-tube group, with mortality rates of 10.64% and 9.30% in the two groups, respectively (χ2 = 0.045, P > 0.05). Postoperative complications occurred in 15 patients (18.5%). There was a high incidence of duodenal (or pancreatic/biliary) leakage.

CONCLUSION

Early diagnosis and operation of duodenal injury are crucial to reducing complications and mortality. Surgical methods should be based on injury grade, associated injuries, and vital signs. Double-tube gastrostomy can reduce complications such as intestinal obstruction.

A delayed presentation of a traumatic isolated duodenal injury

Blunt injury to the abdomen resulting in isolated duodenal injury is rare in surgical practice. Due to the insidious onset of symptoms and the vague non-specific nature of the clinical presentation, these injuries can be easily missed even in experienced hands. Contrary to Europe or developed countries, assaults to the abdomen using hands, fists, and feet in home-based violence is common in third-world countries. These patients have the habit of hiding the assault part of the history to avoid litigations to 'known' people. A high level of suspicion, a continuous revisiting of the history, and timely damage control surgery can improve the outcomes of such patients.

"Repair by Primary Closure of Traumatic Blunt Duodenal Injuries: Simple is Not Always Safe"

INTRODUCTION

Recent literature on managing traumatic duodenal injuries suggests the superiority of primary repair. We hypothesized that duodenal trauma repair by primary closure might not be a safe strategy in an environment dealing predominantly blunt injuries with limited resources.

METHODS

Data analysis was done from the prospectively maintained trauma registry. The study period chosen was from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2018. Data of 63 patients were analyzed for demographics, injuries, management, and outcome. Logistic regression was used to identify mortality predictors.

RESULTS

The most common mechanism of injury was blunt (56/63, 88.9%). Forty (63.5%) patients had associated intraabdominal injuries. The most common American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grade of injury to the duodenum was three in 21 patients. Univariate analysis showed that mortality was associated with hypotension on presentation, higher duodenal grade, associated abdominal vascular injuries, primary closure, and duodenal leak. Logistic regression showed associated associated abdominal vascular injuries, primary closure, and leak remained significant predictors of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary repair was found to be an independent predictor of mortality. A patient's physiology is a critical determinant of the outcome. Liberal use of tube duodenostomy over primary repair seems reasonable for blunt duodenal injury management.

Time from Injury to Initial Operation May Be the Sole Risk Factor for Postoperative Leakage in AAST-OIS 2 and 3 Traumatic Duodenal Injury: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background and Objectives: Traumatic duodenal injury is a rare disease with limited evidence. We aimed to evaluate the risk factors for postoperative leakage and outcomes of pyloric exclusion after duodenal grade 2 and 3 injury. Materials and Methods: We reviewed a prospectively collected trauma database for the period January 2004-December 2020. Patients with grade 2 and 3 traumatic duodenal injury were included. To identify the risk factors for postoperative leakage, we used a stepwise multivariable logistic regression model and a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) logistic model. We constructed a receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve to predict risk factors for postoperative leakage. Results: During the 17-year period, 179,887 trauma patients were admitted to a regional trauma center in Korea. Of these patients, 74 (0.04%) had duodenal injuries. A total of 49 consecutive patients had grade 2 and 3 traumatic duodenal injuries and underwent laparotomy. The incidence of postoperative leakage was 32.6% (16/49). Overall mortality was 18.4% (9/49). A stepwise multivariable logistic regression and LASSO logistic regression model showed that time from injury to initial operation was the sole statistically significant risk factor. The ROC curve at the optimal threshold of 15.77 h showed the following: area under ROC curve, 0.782; sensitivity, 68.8%; specificity, 87.9%; positive predictive value, 73.3%; and negative predictive value, 85.3%. There was no significant difference in outcomes between primary repair alone and pyloric exclusion. Conclusions: Time from injury to initial operation may be the sole significant risk factor for postoperative duodenal leakage. Pyloric exclusion may not be able to prevent postoperative leakage.

Management of Traumatic Duodenal Injuries: A Report from a Single-Center

Purpose: Traumatic duodenal injury is uncommon and due to its difficult diagnosis and accessibility there is an increased risk of mortality and morbidity.Methods: Electronic medical records of a single center were reviewed retrospectively from March 2008 to December 2020 and a total of 7 cases of traumatic duodenal injury were managed by surgical exploration. The site of duodenal perforation, injury mechanisms, operation method, and postoperative outcomes were assessed.Results: The mean age was 55.72 years (range, 34-78), and there were 5 men in the study. The most common mechanism was in-car traffic accident (4 cases), and 1 case each of pedestrian accident, accident during work, and self-injured stab wound. The most common site of injury was between the 3rd and 4th portion (3 cases), followed by the bulb and 1st portion (2 cases), and 2nd portion (2 cases). Segmental resection of the duodenum and primary anastomosis was performed in the 3rd and 4th portion perforation. In cases of 1st and 2nd portion, injury was managed by primary repair or pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. Complications developed in 4 patients, and the most common complication was a problem with the wound; wound seromas developed in 4 cases, entero-cutaneous fistula in 1, and biliary complications in 2 cases. Two patients suffered from intraperitoneal abscess or fluid collection managed by percutaneous drainage. The mean duration of hospital stay was 34 days, and postoperative mortality did not develop.Conclusion: Favorable clinical outcomes were observed in patients with traumatic duodenal injury managed by various surgical approaches.

Review of Traumatic Duodenal Injuries: Etiology, Diagnosis, and Management

Traumatic duodenal injuries are rare and often challenging to diagnose and treat. Management of these injuries remains controversial and continues to evolve. Here, we performed a review of the literature and guidelines for the diagnosis and management of traumatic duodenal injuries.

A common recommendation in more recent literature is primary, tension-free repair of duodenal injuries when possible if surgical repair is necessary. Conversely, if duodenal injuries are unamenable to primary repair, more complex procedures such as Roux-en-Y duodenojejunostomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy may be necessary. Regardless of injury grade or type of surgical repair, the literature continues to support wide extraluminal drainage. Over time, the management of complex duodenal injuries has evolved to favor simple primary repair whenever possible. According to recent studies, more complex procedures are associated with higher rates of post-operative complications and should be reserved for severe injuries when primary repair is not possible.

Pancreas sparing duodenectomy in the treatment of primary duodenal neoplasms and other situations with duodenal involvement

BACKGROUND

There are no clearly defined indications for pancreas-preserving duodenectomy. The present study aimed to analyze postoperative morbidity and the outcomes of patients undergoing pancreas-preserving duodenectomy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing pancreas-preserving duodenectomy from April 2008 to May 2020 were included. We divided the series according to indication: scenario 1, primary duodenal tumors; scenario 2, tumors of another origin with duodenal involvement; and scenario 3, emergency duodenectomy.

RESULTS

We included 35 patients. Total duodenectomy was performed in 1 patient of adenomatous duodenal polyposis, limited duodenectomy in 7, and third + fourth duodenal portion resection in 27. The indications for scenario 1 were gastrointestinal stromal tumor (n = 13), adenocarcinoma (n = 4), neuroendocrine tumor (n = 3), duodenal adenoma (n = 1), and adenomatous duodenal polyposis (n = 1); scenario 2: retroperitoneal desmoid tumor (n = 2), recurrence of liposarcoma (n = 2), retroperitoneal paraganglioma (n = 1), neuroendocrine tumor in pancreatic uncinate process (n = 1), and duodenal infiltration due to metastatic adenopathies of a germinal tumor with digestive hemorrhage (n = 1); and scenario 3: aortoenteric fistula (n = 3), duodenal trauma (n = 1), erosive duodenitis (n = 1), and biliopancreatic limb ischemia (n = 1). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIb) developed in 14% (5/35), and postoperative mortality was 3% (1/35).

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreas-preserving duodenectomy is useful in the management of primary duodenal tumors, and is a technical option for some tumors with duodenal infiltration or in emergency interventions.

Damage control in penetrating duodenal trauma: less is better - the sequel

The overall incidence of duodenal injuries in severely injured trauma patients is between 0.2 to 0.6% and the overall prevalence in those suffering from abdominal trauma is 3 to 5%. Approximately 80% of these cases are secondary to penetrating trauma, commonly associated with vascular and adjacent organ injuries. Therefore, defining the best surgical treatment algorithm remains controversial. Mild to moderate duodenal trauma is currently managed via primary repair and simple surgical techniques. However, severe injuries have required complex surgical techniques without significant favorable outcomes and a consequential increase in mortality rates. This article aims to delineate the experience in the surgical management of penetrating duodenal injuries via the creation of a practical and effective algorithm that includes basic principles of damage control surgery that sticks to the philosophy of "Less is Better". Surgical management of all penetrating duodenal trauma should always default when possible to primary repair. When confronted with a complex duodenal injury, hemodynamic instability, and/or significant associated injuries, the default should be damage control surgery. Definitive reconstructive surgery should be postponed until the patient has been adequately resuscitated and the diamond of death has been corrected.

Contemporary Management of Traumatic Duodenal Injuries

BACKGROUND

Traumatic duodenal injury is a rare, potentially devastating condition with challenging management decisions. Contemporary literature on operative management of duodenal injury is lacking. The purpose of this study is to assess optimal management strategies based on outcomes of patients with traumatic duodenal injury at a single trauma center.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients with traumatic duodenal injury from 2013-2020 at a level 1 trauma center was performed. Patient demographics, grade of injury as noted on CT scan or intraoperatively, surgical procedure(s) performed, and resultant outcomes were extracted.

RESULTS

After excluding one patient due to death on arrival, 23 patients met inclusion criteria. Injuries consisted of grade 1 (n = 7), grade 2 (n = 2), grade 3 (n = 12), and grade 5 (n = 2); there were no grade 4 injuries. Patients were predominantly male (83%) with a median age of 30 years old. Nineteen patients (82%) underwent surgery. Four of nine patients (44%) with grade 1/2 injuries had hematomas and were managed non-operatively. The remaining five patients (56%) with grade 1/2 injuries underwent operation, which included primary repair (n = 3), duodenal exclusion (n = 1), and periduodenal drainage (n = 1). Of 12 patients with grade 3 injury, 6 underwent primary repair and 6 underwent resection. Three patients who underwent primary repair and one who underwent resection developed a duodenal leak. All patients with grade 5 injury (n = 2) underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy.

CONCLUSION

Grade 1 and 2 duodenal hematomas can be managed non-operatively, while lacerations require operative repair. Outcomes may be better following resection in patients with grade 3 injury.