Lessons from Trauma Care: Abdominal Compartment Syndrome and Damage Control Laparotomy in the Patient with Gastrointestinal Disease

THE INITIAL ION SHIFT INDEX AS A PROGNOSTIC INDICATOR TO PREDICT PATIENT SURVIVAL IN TRAUMATIC DAMAGE CONTROL LAPAROTOMY PATIENTS

ABSTRACT

Objective: The ion shift index (ISI), which considers extracellular fluid ions such as phosphate, calcium, and magnesium, represents the ion shift following ischemia; concentrations of these ions are maintained within narrow normal ranges by adenosine triphosphate-dependent homeostasis. The ISI is defined as follows: {potassium (mmol/L-1) + phosphate (mmol/L-1) + Mg (mmol/L-1)}/calcium (mmol/L-1). This study investigated the possibility of predicting the 30-day survival rate of patients who underwent traumatic damage control laparotomy by comparing ISI and other laboratory findings, as well as the initial Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) and shock indices. Methods: Among the 134 patients who underwent damage control surgery between November 2012 and December 2021, 115 patients were enrolled in this study. Data regarding injury mechanism, age, sex, laboratory findings, vital signs, Glasgow Coma Scale score, Injury Severity Score, Abbreviated Injury Scale score, blood component transfusion, type of surgery, postoperative laboratory outcomes, morbidity, mortality rates, fluids administered, and volume of transfusions were collected and analyzed. Results: In univariate analysis, the odds ratio of the initial ISI was 2.875 (95% confidence interval, 1.52-5.43; P = 0.04), which showed a higher correlation with mortality compared with other indices. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under the ROC curve (AUC) were derived from different multivariable logistic regression models. The initial ISI had high sensitivity and specificity in predicting patient mortality (AUC, 0.7378). In addition, in the model combining the initial ISI, crystalloids, and TRISS, the AUC showed a high value (AUC, 0.8227). Conclusion: The ISI evaluated using electrolytes immediately after admission in patients undergoing traumatic damage control surgery may be a predictor of patient mortality.

Simple suture whipstitch closure is a reasonable option for many patients requiring temporary abdominal closure for blunt or penetrating trauma

Objectives

Multiple temporary abdominal closure (TAC) techniques are currently used to manage the open abdomen (OA) in severely injured trauma patients, with variability in efficacy and cost. We evaluated the clinical outcomes of two commonly used TAC methods: ABTHERA Negative Pressure Therapy System and whipstitch suture closure (WC).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of patients who had blunt or penetrating trauma from 2015 to 2021 with OA managed using either ABTHERA, WC, or both. Primary outcomes included overall and intensive care unit length of stay, ventilator days, number of laparotomies, time to definitive fascial closure, and complications (bleeding, evisceration, wound dehiscence, and reoperation). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare baseline characteristics, outcomes, and complications. Potential mediators of the relationship between the type of TAC and outcomes were explored using mediation analyses.

Results

A total of 112 TAC were analyzed; 86 patients had a single type of TAC placement (either WC or ABTHERA), whereas 26 had both types. A majority of patients had blunt trauma in both WC (77%) and ABTHERA (76%) cohorts. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, including injury severity (27.5±12.4 and 27.5±12.0 for ABTHERA and WC, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference among individual complications and overall complications (OR=0.622 (0.274 to 1.412)). No differences were found between the outcomes, and any apparent differences seen were mediated by factors such as a higher number of laparotomies.

Conclusion

WC is a low-cost option for TAC in trauma, with similar clinical outcomes and complications to ABTHERA.

Level of evidence

Level III therapeutic/care management study.

The role of damage control surgery in the treatment of perforated colonic diverticulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Damage control surgery (DCS) is the classic approach to manage severe trauma and has recently also been considered an appropriate approach to the treatment of critically ill patients with severe intra-abdominal sepsis. The purpose of the present review is to evaluate the outcomes following DCS for Hinchey II-IV complicated acute diverticulitis (CAD).

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic search was undertaken to identify all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies, irrespectively of their size, publication status, and language. Adults who have undergone DCS for CAD Hinchey II, III, or IV were included in this review. DCS is compared with the immediate and definitive surgical treatment in the form of HP, colonic resection, and primary anastomosis (RPA) with or without covering stoma or laparoscopic lavage. We searched the following electronic databases: PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge. The protocol of this systematic review and meta-analysis was published on Prospero (CRD42020144953).

RESULTS

Nine studies with 318 patients, undergoing DCS, were included. The presence of septic shock at the presentation in the emergency department was heterogeneous, and the weighted mean rate of septic shock across the studies was shown to be 35.1% [95% CI 8.4 to 78.6%]. The majority of the patients had Hinchey III (68.3%) disease. The remainder had either Hinchey IV (28.9%) or Hinchey II (2.8%). Phase I is similarly described in most of the studies as lavage, limited resection with closed blind colonic ends. In a few studies, resection and anastomosis (9.1%) or suture of the perforation site (0.9%) were performed in phase I of DCS. In those patients who underwent DCS, the most common method of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) was the negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) (97.8%). The RPA was performed in 62.1% [95% CI 40.8 to 83.3%] and the 22.7% [95% CI 15.1 to 30.3%]: 12.8% during phase I and 87.2% during phase III. A covering ileostomy was performed in 6.9% [95% CI 1.5 to 12.2%]. In patients with RPA, the overall leak was 7.3% [95% CI 4.3 to 10.4%] and the major anastomotic leaks were 4.7% [95% CI 2.0 to 7.4%]; the rate of postoperative mortality was estimated to be 9.2% [95% CI 6.0 to 12.4%].

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis revealed an approximately 62.1% weighted rate of achieving GI continuity with the DCS approach to generalized peritonitis in Hinchey III and IV with major leaks of 4.7% and overall mortality of 9.2%. Despite the promising results, we are aware of the limitations related to the significant heterogeneity of inclusion criteria. Importantly, the low rate of reported septic shock may point toward selection bias. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness of the DCS approach.

Emergency Laparotomies: Causes, Pathophysiology, and Outcomes

Emergency laparotomies have remained a challenging entity since many decades. Only during the past 10 years, serious efforts have been made to improve their outcome by conducting audits and designing care pathways. Indications for emergency laparotomies can be broadly classified into trauma and non-trauma surgeries, which are either done for control of hemorrhage or/and done for control of sepsis and organ dysfunction. Goal-directed resuscitation for septic/hemorrhagic shock, consultant-led multidisciplinary teams, and timely transfer to intensive care units form core principles of management for these patients. Global inequity in access to standard and affordable emergency surgeries is an area of concern requiring integrated efforts at international level.

How to cite this article: Ahmed A, Azim A. Emergency Laparotomies: Causes, Pathophysiology, and Outcomes. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 4):S183–S189.