Penetrating pelvic trauma: Initial assessment and surgical management in emergency

Firearm injury to the left buttock with uterus penetrating trauma

A multispecialty trauma team must provide care for pelvic gunshot wounds (PGW) due to the high risk of associated morbidity and mortality, the high density of organs that might be wounded within the pelvis, and the potential consequences of these complicated injuries. We present a case of a 59-year-old woman hemodynamically stable with firearm injury to the left buttock. CT examination showed free air in the peritoneal cavity and in the retroperitoneum and a focal contrast extravasation within the uterine fundus. The patient underwent urgent laparotomy that revealed triple bowel perforation (sigmoid colon, medium rectum, ileum) and a laceration of the posterior and anterior uterine wall at level of the cervix with no signs of active bleeding. The bullet was lodged above the peritoneal reflection, in the right pelvis, and it was removed, and handed over to the judicial authority. The perforated bowel segments were resected with Hartmann's procedure and ileal anastomosis. The uterine laceration was repaired. Although all the viscera and the structures along the trajectory can be harmed, pelvic gunshot wounds have the potential to inflict serious injury. Nongravid uterine traumas are a unique occurrence, and proper care requires an understanding of lesion grading. Finding the gynecological lesion in female patients is essential to receiving the best care and protecting the reproductive system.

Evaluation of urological and gynecological surgeons as force multipliers for mass casualty trauma care

BACKGROUND

The clinical demands of mass casualty events strain even the most well-equipped trauma centers and are especially challenging in resource-limited rural, remote, or austere environments. Gynecologists and urologists care for patients with pelvic and abdominal injuries, but the extent to which they are able to serve as "force multipliers" for trauma care is unclear. This study examined the abilities of urologists and gynecologists to perform 32 trauma procedures after mentored training by expert trauma educators to inform the potential for these specialists to independently care for trauma patients.

METHODS

Urological (6), gynecological surgeons (6), senior (postgraduate year 5) general surgery residents (6), and non-trauma-trained general surgeons (8) completed a rigorous trauma training program (Advanced Surgical Skills Exposure in Trauma Plus). All participants were assessed in their trauma knowledge and surgical abilities performing 32 trauma procedures before/after mentored training by expert trauma surgeons. Performance benchmarks were set for knowledge (80%) and independent accurate completion of all procedural components within a realistic time window (90%).

RESULTS

General surgery participants demonstrated greater trauma knowledge than gynecologists and urologists; however, none of the specialties reached the 80% benchmark. Before training, general surgery, and urology participants outperformed gynecologists for overall procedural abilities. After training, only general surgeons met the 90% benchmark. Post hoc analysis revealed no differences between the groups performing most pelvic and abdominal procedures; however, knowledge associated with decision making and judgment in the provision of trauma care was significantly below the benchmark for gynecologists and urologists, even after training.

CONCLUSION

For physiologically stable patients with traumatic injuries to the abdomen, pelvis, or retroperitoneum, these specialists might be able to provide appropriate care; however, they would best benefit trauma patients in the capacity of highly skilled assisting surgeons to trauma specialists. These specialists should not be considered for solo resuscitative surgical care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Hemorrhagic Shock in Isolated and Non-Isolated Pelvic Fractures: A Registries-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Pelvic fractures resulting from high-energy trauma can frequently present with life-threatening hemodynamic instability that is associated with high mortality rates. The role of pelvic exsanguination in causing hemorrhagic shock is unclear, as associated injuries frequently accompany pelvic fractures. This study aims to compare the incidence of hemorrhagic shock and in-hospital outcomes in patients with isolated and non-isolated pelvic fractures.

METHODS

Registries-based study of trauma patients hospitalized following pelvic fractures. Data from 1997 to 2021 were cross-referenced between the Israel Defense Forces Trauma Registry (IDF-TR), documenting prehospital care, and Israel National Trauma Registry (INTR) recording hospitalization data. Patients with isolated pelvic fractures were defined as having an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) <3 in other anatomical regions, and compared with patients sustaining pelvic fracture and at least one associated injury (AIS ≥ 3). Signs of profound shock upon emergency department (ED) arrival were defined as either a systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg and/or a heart rate >130 beats per min.

RESULTS

Overall, 244 hospitalized trauma patients with pelvic fractures were included, most of whom were males (84.4%) with a median age of 21 years. The most common injury mechanisms were motor vehicle collisions (64.8%), falls from height (13.1%) and gunshot wounds (11.5%). Of these, 68 (27.9%) patients sustained isolated pelvic fractures. In patients with non-isolated fractures, the most common regions with a severe associated injury were the thorax and abdomen. Signs of shock were recorded for 50 (20.5%) patients upon ED arrival, but only four of these had isolated pelvic fractures. In-hospital mortality occurred among 18 (7.4%) patients, all with non-isolated fractures.

CONCLUSION

In young patients with pelvic fractures, severe associated injuries were common, but isolated pelvic fractures rarely presented with profound shock upon arrival. Prehospital management protocols for pelvic fractures should prioritize prompt evacuation and resuscitative measures aimed at addressing associated injuries.

Use of Kaolin-Impregnated Gauze Aids in Hemostasis and Blood Loss Mitigation in a Penetrating Injury to the Bladder and Small Bowel

Hemorrhage control can be technically challenging in penetrating injuries to the pelvis. In an era of decreased availability of blood, rapid hemostasis is critical to minimize blood loss, limit transfusions, and control contamination from hollow viscus injuries. QuikClot Control+® 12x12 Hemostatic Device(C+) (Teleflex Medical OEM, Plymouth, MN), a form of kaolin-impregnated gauze, maybe a helpful adjunct to ebb the flow of hemorrhage from large surface area wounds. We present a case in which C+ was utilized in the preperitoneal packing of a gunshot wound to the pelvis and aided in obtaining hemostasis while simultaneously allowing the team time to complete the remainder of the case. Though further large randomized control trials are required to identify the role of C+ in trauma laparotomy, it remains a tool in the surgeon's armamentarium when dealing with hemorrhage.

Proposal of an algorithm for the management of rectally inserted foreign bodies: a surgical single-center experience with review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Retained rectal foreign bodies (RFBs) are uncommon clinical findings. Although the management of RFBs is rarely reported in the literature, clinicians regularly face this issue. To date, there is no standardized management of RFBs. The aim of the present study was to evaluate our own data and subsequently develop a treatment algorithm.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who presented between January 2006 and December 2019 with rectally inserted RFBs at the emergency department of the Klinikum Stuttgart, Germany, were retrospectively identified. Clinicopathologic features, management, complications, and outcomes were assessed. Based on this experience, a treatment algorithm was developed.

RESULTS

A total of 69 presentations with rectally inserted RFBs were documented in 57 patients. In 23/69 cases (33.3%), the RFB was removed transanally by the emergency physician either digitally (n = 14) or with the help of a rigid rectoscope (n = 8) or a colonoscope (n = 1). In 46/69 cases (66.7%), the RFB was removed in the operation theater under general anesthesia with muscle relaxation. Among these, 11/46 patients (23.9%) underwent abdominal surgery, either for manual extraction of the RFB (n = 9) or to exclude a bowel perforation (n = 2). Surgical complications occurred in 3/11 patients. One patient with rectal perforation developed pelvic sepsis and underwent abdominoperineal extirpation in the further clinical course.

CONCLUSION

The management of RFBs can be challenging and includes a wide range of options from removal without further intervention to abdominoperineal extirpation in cases of pelvic sepsis. Whenever possible, RFBs should obligatorily be managed in specialized colorectal centers following a clear treatment algorithm.

[The urologist confronted with a mass killing]

INTRODUCTION

Following the Paris attacks in 2015, the French hospital system has had to organize itself in mass casualties of serious injuries, especially hemorrhagic shock. Recent experience shows that the first flow of casualties is spontaneously directed to the structure closest to the events, whether it is suitable or not. Any surgeon can face such a crisis regardless of their practice structure, because terrorist attacks are unpredictable. The urologist must anticipate the responsibilities that they might be forced to shoulder in such a situation.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A systematic literature review based on PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar was conducted between January 2000 and June 2021.

RESULTS

In addition to a coordinator role, reserved for the most experienced, his visceral surgical expertise would allow a urologist to apply damage control (DC) at each stage. We describe here the principles of DC, in particular the DC laparotomy including its strategy concerning genitourinary lesions.

DISCUSSION

Whatever his role (sorter, organizer, technician) in the management of a mass casualties of hemorrhagic injuries, an urologist has to know the principles of DC. A damage control laparotomy (stage 1 of DC) requires the urologist surgeon to never seek to perform a primary reconstruction procedure but to favor speed and efficiency (both on the hemostatic and urostatic side) to lead the injured patient stabilized to faster in intensive care unit (stage 2). Revision surgery called "definitive surgical management" (stage 3) will be performed anyway at the end of this period.

Endovascular management of pelvic trauma

Traumatic pelvic injuries are an important group of acquired pathologies given their frequent association with significant vascular compromise. Potentially fatal as a consequence of rapid hemorrhage, achievement of early hemostasis is a priority; endovascular management of traumatic pelvic arterial injuries is an important potential option for treatment. Precipitated by any number of mechanisms of trauma, pelvic vascular injury necessitates timely patient assessment. Variable patterns of arterial injury may result from blunt, penetrating or iatrogenic trauma. Selection of the most appropriate imaging modality is a priority, ensuring streamlined access to treatment. In the case of CT, this is complemented by acquisition of the most appropriate phase of imaging; review of both arterial and delayed phase imaging improves the accuracy of detection of low-flow hemorrhage. In cases where surgical intervention is not deemed appropriate, endovascular treatment provides an alternative means for cessation of hemorrhage associated with pelvic injuries. This may be achieved in a selective or nonselective manner depending on the patient's clinical status and time constraints. Consequently, a detailed understanding of vascular anatomy is essential, including an appreciation of the normal variant anatomy between males and females. Additional consideration must be given to variant anatomy which may co-exist in both sexes. This review article aims to provide a synopsis of endovascular management of pelvic vascular injury. Through case examples, available treatment options will be discussed, including thrombin injection and transcatheter arterial embolization. Furthermore, potential adverse complications of pelvic arterial embolization will be highlighted. Finally, in view of the potential severity of these injuries, a brief overview of initial management of the hemodynamically unstable patient is provided.

Wooden Penetrating Pelvic Trauma Passing the Foramen Ischiadicum

We describe the case of a 45-year-old woman who suffered an impalement injury of the pelvis with penetration of the sciatic foramen by a wooden foreign body. Following a single operation, the injury healed without complications or infection. We have taken this as an opportunity to describe the case and our standard procedure in more detail.

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA): indications: advantages and challenges of implementation in traumatic non-compressible torso hemorrhage

Background

Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is regaining popularity in the treatment of traumatic non-compressible torso bleeding. Advances in invasive radiology coupled with new damage control measures assisted in the refinement of the technique with promising outcomes. The literature continues to have substantial heterogeneity about REBOA indications, applications, and the challenges confronted when implementing the technique in a level I trauma center. Scoping reviews are excellent platforms to assess the diverse literature of a new technique. It is for the first time that a scoping review is adopted for this topic. Advances in invasive radiology coupled with new damage control measures assisted in the refinement of the technique with promising outcomes. The literature continues to have substantial heterogeneity about REBOA indications, applications, and the challenges confronted when implementing the technique in a level I trauma center. Scoping reviews are excellent platforms to assess the diverse literature of a new technique. It is for the first time that a scoping review is adopted for this topic.

Methods

Critical search from MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, COCHRANE CENTRAL, PUBMED and SCOPUS were conducted from the earliest available dates until March 2018. Evidence-based articles, as well as gray literature at large, were analyzed regardless of the quality of articles.

Results

We identified 1176 articles related to the topic from all available database sources and 57 reviews from the gray literature search. The final review yielded 105 articles. Quantitative and qualitative variables included patient demographics, study design, study objectives, methods of data collection, indications, REBOA protocol used, time to deployment, zone of deployment, occlusion time, complications, outcome, and the level of expertise at the concerned trauma center.

Conclusion

Growing levels of evidence support the use of REBOA in selected indications. Our data analysis showed an advantage for its use in terms of morbidities and physiologic derangement in comparison to other resuscitation measures. Current challenges remain in the selective application, implementation, competency assessment, and credentialing for the use of REBOA in trauma settings. The identification of the proper indication, terms of use, and possible advantage of the prehospital and partial REBOA are topics for further research.

Level of evidence

Level III.

The European guideline on management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following trauma: fifth edition

BACKGROUND

Severe traumatic injury continues to present challenges to healthcare systems around the world, and post-traumatic bleeding remains a leading cause of potentially preventable death among injured patients. Now in its fifth edition, this document aims to provide guidance on the management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following traumatic injury and encourages adaptation of the guiding principles described here to individual institutional circumstances and resources.

METHODS

The pan-European, multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma was founded in 2004, and the current author group included representatives of six relevant European professional societies. The group applied a structured, evidence-based consensus approach to address scientific queries that served as the basis for each recommendation and supporting rationale. Expert opinion and current clinical practice were also considered, particularly in areas in which randomised clinical trials have not or cannot be performed. Existing recommendations were re-examined and revised based on scientific evidence that has emerged since the previous edition and observed shifts in clinical practice. New recommendations were formulated to reflect current clinical concerns and areas in which new research data have been generated.

RESULTS

Advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology of post-traumatic coagulopathy have supported improved management strategies, including evidence that early, individualised goal-directed treatment improves the outcome of severely injured patients. The overall organisation of the current guideline has been designed to reflect the clinical decision-making process along the patient pathway in an approximate temporal sequence. Recommendations are grouped behind the rationale for key decision points, which are patient- or problem-oriented rather than related to specific treatment modalities. While these recommendations provide guidance for the diagnosis and treatment of major bleeding and coagulopathy, emerging evidence supports the author group's belief that the greatest outcome improvement can be achieved through education and the establishment of and adherence to local clinical management algorithms.

CONCLUSIONS

A multidisciplinary approach and adherence to evidence-based guidance are key to improving patient outcomes. If incorporated into local practice, these clinical practice guidelines have the potential to ensure a uniform standard of care across Europe and beyond and better outcomes for the severely bleeding trauma patient.