Spectrum of paediatric blunt abdominal trauma in a tertiary care hospital in India

Aim

To study the profile of paediatric blunt abdominal trauma and to assess the correlation of grade of injury with the outcome.

Materials and Methods

It is a prospective observational study from January 2015 to December 2020. Children below 12 years with blunt abdominal trauma were included. Patient demographic data, treatment given and the final outcome were recorded. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 6 months to maximum 5 years.

Results

A total of 68 patients were included in the study. Fall from height was the most common mode of injury (62%) followed by road traffic accidents (35%) and the other causes included in the miscellaneous group (hit by animal and fall of heavy object on the abdomen; 3%). Most commonly injured organ was liver (n = 28, 41%) followed by spleen (n = 18, 26%) and kidney (n = 15, 22%). Other injuries were bowel perforations (jejunal [n = 4], ileal [n = 1] and large bowel [n = 1]; 9%), pancreaticoduodenal (n = 5, 7%), urinary bladder (n = 3, 4%), abdominal vascular injury (iliac vein-1, inferior vena cava-1;3%), adrenal haematoma (n = 2,3%) and common bile duct (CBD) injury (n = 1, 1%). More than one organ injury was seen in 13 cases (19%). Non-operative management was successful in 84% (n = 27) and laparotomy was done in 16% (n = 11). Most of the patients sustained Grade IV injury (n = 36, 53%) and majority of the patients (n = 60, 88%) had good outcome without any long-term complications.

Conclusion

Profile of paediatric blunt abdominal trauma include solid organ injuries such as liver, spleen, kidney, pancreas, adrenal gland and others like bowel injury, CBD, urinary bladder and abdominal vascular injury. The grade of injury does not correlate with the outcome in a higher grade of injury and these children had good outcome.

Predictors of need for endovascular intervention in hepatic trauma

PURPOSE

Non-operative management of hepatic trauma with adjunctive hepatic arterial embolization (HAE) is widely accepted. Despite careful patient selection utilizing CTA, a substantial proportion of angiograms are negative for arterial injury and no HAE is performed. This study aims to determine which CT imaging findings and clinical factors are associated with the presence of active extravasation on subsequent angiography in patients with hepatic trauma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The charts of 243 adults who presented with abdominal trauma and underwent abdominal CTA followed by conventional angiography were retrospectively reviewed. Of these patients, 49 had hepatic injuries on CTA. Hepatic injuries were graded using the American association for the surgery of trauma (AAST) CT classification, and CT images were assessed for active contrast extravasation, arterial pseudoaneurysm, sentinel clot, hemoperitoneum, laceration in-volving more than 2 segments, and laceration involving specific anatomic landmarks (porta hepatis, hepatic veins, and gallbladder fossa). Medical records were reviewed for pre- and post-angiography blood pressures, hemoglobin levels, and transfusion requirements. Angiographic images and reports were reviewed for hepatic arterial injury and performance of HAE.

RESULTS

In multivariate analysis, AAST hepatic injury grade was significantly associated with increased odds of HAE (Odds ratio: 2.5, 95% CI 1.1, 7.1, p = 0.049). Univariate analyses demonstrated no significant association between CT liver injury grade, CT characteristics of liver injury, or pre-angiographic clinical data with need for HAE.

CONCLUSION

In patients with hepatic trauma, prediction of need for HAE based on CT findings alone is challenging; such patients require consideration of both clinical factors and imaging findings.

Non-operative management of blunt splenic trauma: The role of splenic artery embolization depending on the severity of parenchymal injury

PURPOSE

To address the disagreement about the need for splenic artery embolization (SAE) in medium grade blunt splenic trauma this retrospective study evaluates the clinical outcome of non-operative management (NOM) and the possible impact of a more liberal indication for primary SAE.

METHOD

From 01/2010 to 12/2019 186 patients presented with splenic injury on computed tomography (CT) after blunt abdominal trauma. The extent of splenic injuries according to Marmery, vascular pathologies, active bleeding as well as clinical and laboratory parameters were recorded and analyzed with regard to the success rates of NOM and SAE. Procedural complications and clinical outcome were noted. The number needed to treat (NNT) was determined for a possible extension of the indication for SAE to grade 3 injuries.

RESULTS

Of 186 patients 126 were managed non-operatively, 47 underwent primary SAE and twelve splenectomy. NOM was successful in 119/126 (94 %) patients. Conversion rate was significantly higher in patients with active bleeding or vascular pathology. Patients with failed NOM had a significantly greater decrease in haemoglobin and haematocrit levels. Primary SAE was successful in 45/47 (96 %) cases. Major complications occurred in four cases (9%), all managed without sequela. The NNT in grade 3 splenic injuries equals 13.

CONCLUSIONS

NOM of low to medium-grade blunt splenic trauma has a low failure rate. Presence of active haemorrhage is the most important predictor for failure of NOM. SAE should be reserved for high-grade injuries and visible vascular pathology or active bleeding to avoid a disproportionate increase in the NNT.

Splenic trauma in the twenty-first century: changing trends in management

Over the past three decades, management of blunt splenic trauma has changed radically. Use of improved diagnostic techniques and proper understanding of disease pathology has led to nonoperative management being chosen as the standard of care in patients who are haemodynamically stable. This review was undertaken to assess available literature regarding changing trends of management of blunt splenic trauma, and to identify the existing lacunae in nonoperative management. The PubMed database was searched for studies published between January 1987 and August 2017, using the keywords 'blunt splenic trauma' and 'nonoperative management'. One hundred and fifty-three articles were reviewed, of which 82 free full texts and free abstracts were used in the current review. There is clear evidence in published literature of the greater success of nonoperative over operative management in patients who are haemodynamically stable and the increasing utility of adjunctive therapies like angiography with embolisation. However, the review revealed a lack of universal guidelines for patient selection criteria and diagnostic and grading procedures needed for nonoperative management. Indications for splenic artery embolisation, the current role of splenectomy and spleen-preserving surgeries, together with the place of minimal access surgery in blunt splenic trauma remain grey areas. Moreover, parameters affecting the outcomes of nonoperative management and its failure and management need to be defined. This shows a need for future studies focused on these shortcomings with the ultimate aim being the formulation and implementation of universally accepted guidelines for safe and efficient management of blunt splenic trauma.

Splenic artery embolization: technically feasible but not necessarily advantageous

Background

The spleen is the second most commonly injured organ in cases of abdominal trauma. Management of splenic injury depends on the clinical status of the patient and can include nonoperative management (NOM), splenic artery embolization (SAE), surgery (operative splenic salvage or splenectomy), or a combination of these treatments. In nonoperatively managed cases, SAE is sometimes used to control haemorrhage. However, the indications for SAE have not been clearly defined and, in some cases, the potential complications of the procedure may outweigh its benefits.

Review of the literature

Through review of the literature we address the question of when SAE is indicated in combination with NOM of splenic injury, and whether SAE may delay needed surgical treatment in some cases. This systematic review highlighted the use of imperfect and inconsistent scoring systems in the diagnosis of splenic injury, the lack of consensus regarding indications for SAE, and the potential for severe morbidities associated with this procedure. Based on current literature and evidence we provide a new, non-verified, decision algorithm.

Conclusions

NOM+ SAE involves potential risks and operative management may be preferable to SAE for certain patients. To clarify current literature, we propose a new algorithm for blunt abdominal trauma that should be validated prospectively. New evidence-based protocols should be developed to guide diagnosis and management of patients with splenic trauma.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13017-016-0100-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Is it possible to use transaminases for deciding on surgical or non-operative treatment for blunt liver trauma?

BACKGROUND

We aimed to research the relation of transaminase levels in blunt liver trauma (BLT) with the intensity of the trauma and the use of transaminase levels for deciding on surgical or non-operative treatment.

METHODS

In all, 44 patients with BLT diagnosed by computerized tomography (CT) were involved in this retrospective study. By testing the correlation of the transaminase levels and the grade of liver injury with receiver operator characteristics (ROC), area under the curve (AUC) was calculated; besides, the sensitivity, specificity, and cut-off values of transaminases were calculated separately for the grades. Moreover, same method was repeated for the surgically and non-operatively treated patients. Cut-off value was assessed for surgical and non-operative treatments. The efficiency of transaminases in deciding non-operative treatment was compared with that of other methods using ROC test applied on focused abdominal sonography in trauma (FAST), hemodynamic instability, blood replacement rate, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and alanine aminotransferase (ALT).

RESULTS

It was observed that the AUC, sensitivity, and specificity increased correspondingly with the grade rise of transaminase levels in BLT. In the selection of non-operative treatment/surgery, following values have been confirmed: AUC for AST: 0.851 (sensitivity: 86%, specificity: 73%, cut-off value: 498 U/L), AUC for ALT: 0.880 (sensitivity: 86%, specificity: 81%, cut-off value: 498 U/L), AUC for replacement: 0.948 (sensitivity: 86%, specificity: 94%), AUC for hemodynamic instability: 0.902 (sensitivity: 86%, specificity: 94%), and AUC for FAST: 0.642 (sensitivity: 57%, specificity: 75%).

CONCLUSIONS

It was found that in BLT, transaminases can predict the injury rating with higher accuracy as the grade rises, and they outrival FAST in terms of determining the need for laparotomy.

The key role of the radiologist in the management of polytrauma patients: indications for MDCT imaging in emergency radiology

Trauma causes greater losses of life years and it is the most common cause of death for people under the age of 45. Time is one of the most relevant factors for the survival of injured patients, particularly the time elapsed from trauma until the resuscitation procedures. As a member of the trauma team, the radiologist contributes to the rapid diagnosis of traumatic disorders, with appropriate imaging modalities. Based on the evidence, the most appropriate diagnostic tool for severe/multiple trauma is computed tomography (CT). With the advent of multidetector CT (MDCT), radiologists are able to more effectively characterize life-threatening traumatic disorders within a few seconds in stable or stabilized patients. Considering the diagnostic potential of MDCT, conventional radiographs could be virtually abandoned in the diagnostic algorithms for adult polytraumatized patients. The radiologist helps to facilitate triage and to assess the optimal individual treatment for polytrauma patients, thus contributing to the improvement of patient outcomes. In this article, the indications for MDCT in the polytrauma setting are discussed.

The management of blunt splenic injury with active bleeding: A review

Blunt splenic injuries are a common management problem facing general surgeons. It has been suggested that management of blunt splenic injuries should take into account the presence of active bleeding and the Organ Injury Scale (OIS grade); where active bleeding is more significant with OIS grade IV and V injuries. This paper aims to review our management of blunt splenic injuries with active bleeding in the haemodynamically stable patient. The trauma databases of two tertiary referral centres in Queensland were reviewed for patients admitted with blunt abdominal injuries since 2006. The management of patients with splenic injury and active bleeding was reviewed. A total of 173 patients were admitted after 2006. Twenty-six of these patients had active bleeding and nine were treated conservatively. Four patients failed conservative management and required further intervention. Three patients with OIS grades IV or V were managed conservatively and failed this management requiring further intervention. Our results indicate that conservative management is not possible for OIS grades IV and V injuries. Furthermore, splenic artery embolisation augments the success of conservative management and reduces the need for splenectomy. These findings are consistent with the current literature suggesting that management of blunt splenic injury must take into consideration factors other than the Organ Injury Scale.

Non operative management of abdominal trauma - a 10 years review

INTRODUCTION

Due to high rate of operative mortality and morbidity non-operative management of blunt liver and spleen trauma was widely accepted in stable pediatric patients, but the general surgeons were skeptical to adopt it for adults. The current study is analysis of so far largest sample (1071) of hemodynamically stable blunt liver, spleen, kidney and pancreatic trauma patients managed non operatively irrespective of severity of a single /multiple solid organ injury or other associated injuries with high rate of success.

METHODS

Experience of 1071 blunt abdominal trauma patients treated by NOM at a tertiary care National Trauma Centre in Oman (from Jan 2001 to Dec 2011) was reviewed, analyzed to determine the indications, methods and results of NOM. Hemodynamic stability along with ultra sound, CT scan and repeated clinical examination were the sheet anchors of NOM. The patients were grouped as (1) managed by NOM successfully, (2) failure of NOM and (3) directly subjected to surgery.

RESULTS

During the 10 year period, 5400 polytrauma patients were evaluated for abdominal trauma of which 1285 had abdominal injuries, the largest sample study till date. Based on initial findings 1071 patients were admitted for NOM. Out of 1071 patients initially selected 963 (89.91%) were managed non operatively, the remaining 108 (10.08%) were subjected to laparotomy due to failure of NOM. Laparotomy was performed on 214(19.98%) patients as they were unstable on admission or had evidence of hollow viscous injury.

CONCLUSION

NOM for blunt abdominal injuries was found to be highly successful in 89.98% of the patients in our study. Management depended on clinical and hemodynamic stability of the patient. A patient under NOM should be admitted to intensive care / high dependency for at least 48-72 hours for close monitoring of vital signs, repeated clinical examinations and follow up investigations as indicated.

Prognostic factors for failure of nonoperative management in adults with blunt splenic injury: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Contradictory findings are reported in the literature concerning prognostic factors for failure of nonoperative management (NOM) in the treatment of adults with blunt splenic injury. The objective of this systematic review was to identify prognostic factors for failure of NOM, with or without angiography and embolization.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched. Prospective or retrospective cohort studies addressing failure of nonoperative treatment, with and/or without angiography and embolization, of blunt abdominal injuries were included. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 335 titles and abstracts were screened, of which 31 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. No randomized controlled trials were found. Ten articles were qualified as high-quality articles and used for data extraction (best-evidence synthesis). A total of 25 prognostic factors were investigated, of which 14 were statistically significant in one or more studies. Strong evidence exists that age of 40 years or above, Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 25 or greater, and splenic injury grade of 3 or greater are prognostic factors for failure of NOM. Moderate evidence was found for a splenic Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater, trauma and ISS of less than 0.80, the presence of an intraparenchymal contrast blush, as well as transfusion of 1 unit of packed red blood cells or more. Limited evidence was found for large hemoperitoneum, lower Revised Trauma Score, lower Glasgow Coma Scale score, lower systolic blood pressure, male sex, the presence of traumatic brain injury, and splenic embolization as protective factor for failure of NOM.

CONCLUSION

Awareness for failure of NOM is required in patients aged 40 years or older, in patients with an ISS of 25 or higher or those with splenic injury grade 3 or higher. The prognostic factors for failure that we identified should be confirmed in future prospective cohort studies or meta-analyses using individual patient data.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, level III.

Multidetector CT of blunt abdominal trauma

The morbidity, mortality, and economic costs resulting from trauma in general, and blunt abdominal trauma in particular, are substantial. The "panscan" (computed tomographic [CT] examination of the head, neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis) has become an essential element in the early evaluation and decision-making algorithm for hemodynamically stable patients who sustained abdominal trauma. CT has virtually replaced diagnostic peritoneal lavage for the detection of important injuries. Over the past decade, substantial hardware and software developments in CT technology, especially the introduction and refinement of multidetector scanners, have expanded the versatility of CT for examination of the polytrauma patient in multiple facets: higher spatial resolution, faster image acquisition and reconstruction, and improved patient safety (optimization of radiation delivery methods). In this article, the authors review the elements of multidetector CT technique that are currently relevant for evaluating blunt abdominal trauma and describe the most important CT signs of trauma in the various organs. Because conservative nonsurgical therapy is preferred for all but the most severe injuries affecting the solid viscera, the authors emphasize the CT findings that are indications for direct therapeutic intervention.

Nonoperative management of blunt hepatic injury: an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline

BACKGROUND

During the last century, the management of blunt force trauma to the liver has changed from observation and expectant management in the early part of the 1900s to mainly operative intervention, to the current practice of selective operative and nonoperative management. These issues were first addressed by the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma in the Practice Management Guidelines for Nonoperative Management of Blunt Injury to the Liver and Spleen published online in 2003. Since that time, a large volume of literature on these topics has been published requiring a reevaluation of the previous Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma guideline.

METHODS

The National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health MEDLINE database were searched using PubMed (http://www.pubmed.gov). The search was designed to identify English-language citations published after 1996 (the last year included in the previous guideline) using the keywords liver injury and blunt abdominal trauma.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-six articles were reviewed, of which 94 were used to create the current practice management guideline for the selective nonoperative management of blunt hepatic injury.

CONCLUSION

Most original hepatic guidelines remained valid and were incorporated into the greatly expanded current guidelines as appropriate. Nonoperative management of blunt hepatic injuries currently is the treatment modality of choice in hemodynamically stable patients, irrespective of the grade of injury or patient age. Nonoperative management of blunt hepatic injuries should only be considered in an environment that provides capabilities for monitoring, serial clinical evaluations, and an operating room available for urgent laparotomy. Patients presenting with hemodynamic instability and peritonitis still warrant emergent operative intervention. Intravenous contrast enhanced computed tomographic scan is the diagnostic modality of choice for evaluating blunt hepatic injuries. Repeated imaging should be guided by a patient's clinical status. Adjunctive therapies like angiography, percutaneous drainage, endoscopy/endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopy remain important adjuncts to nonoperative management of hepatic injuries. Despite the explosion of literature on this topic, many questions regarding nonoperative management of blunt hepatic injuries remain without conclusive answers in the literature.

Non-operative management of liver trauma

The liver is one of the commonest intra-abdominal organs injured worldwide in blunt and penetrating trauma and its management has evolved significantly in the last 30 years. Mandatory laparotomy has been replaced by an acceptance that for most blunt hepatic trauma, a selective non-operative approach is safe and effective with a failure rate ie the need to proceed to delayed laparotomy of approximately 10%. There is a markedly lower rate of complications in those that are managed non-operatively. Adjuncts to this conservative regimen such as angioembolisation and delayed laparoscopy to treat biliary peritonitis increase the chances of avoiding laparotomy. This belief in non-operative management has also been transferred to some degree to penetrating liver trauma, where there is a gradual accumulation of evidence to support this non-operative approach in a carefully selected group of patients. This article examines the evidence supporting the selective non-operative management of both blunt and penetrating liver trauma and describes the outcomes and complications.

Solid Organ Injury Grading in Trauma: Accuracy of Grading by Surgical Residents

The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma developed an Organ Injury Scale for management of patients with splenic, kidney, or liver injuries. Despite widespread use of the guidelines, the person who determines the injury grade varies among institutions. Our purpose was to determine the accuracy and interobserver agreement between surgical residents and a radiologist in grading solid organ injuries. We retrospectively reviewed patients with solid organ injuries from January 2009 to May 2010 and compared the grade of solid organ injuries by a single resident with grades by a single blinded radiologist using a paired t test, analysis of variance, or Kruskal-Wallis. Computed tomography scans of 58 patients with splenic injuries, 43 with liver injuries, and 16 with kidney injuries were reviewed. Average grades for splenic injuries were 2.5 and 2.4 (radiologist/resident); liver injuries, 2.6 and 2.1; and kidney injuries, 2.7 and 2.8. There were no significant differences in grading by the radiologist and resident for splenic and kidney injuries; however, equal values were only achieved in 43 and 38 per cent, respectively. There was a significant difference (average rating difference 0.54, P = 0.0002) in grading between the radiologist and resident for liver injuries with only 35 per cent having equal values and the radiologist grading on average 0.5 points higher than the resident. No demographic, injury, or outcome variables were significantly associated with interobserver variability ( P > 0.05). Despite a significant difference for liver injury grading, interobserver agreement between residents and a single radiologist was low. Clinical implications and the impact on outcomes related to interobserver variations require further study.

Severe hepatic trauma: nonoperative management, definitive repair, or damage control surgery?

BACKGROUND

Management of severe liver injuries has evolved to include the options for nonoperative management and damage control surgery. The present study analyzes the criteria for choosing between nonoperative management and early surgery, and definitive repair versus damage control strategy during early surgery.

METHODS

In a retrospective analysis of 144 patients with severe (AAST grade III-V) liver injuries (94% blunt trauma), early laparotomy was performed in 50 patients. Initial management was nonoperative in 94 blunt trauma patients with 8 failures. Uni- and multivariate analyses were used to calculate predictor odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Factors associated with early laparotomy in blunt trauma included shock on admission, associated grade IV-V splenic injury, grade IV-V head injury, and grade V liver injury. Only shock was an independent predictor (OR, 26.1; 95% CI, 8.9-77.1; P < 0.001). The presence of a grade IV-V splenic injury predicted damage control strategy (OR infinite; P = 0.021). Failed nonoperative management was associated with grade IV-V splenic injury (OR, 14.00; 95% CI, 1.67-117.55), and shock (OR, 6.82; 95% CI, 1.49-31.29). The hospital mortality rate was 15%; 8 of 21 deaths were liver-related. Shock (OR, 9.3; 95% CI, 2.4-35.8; P = 0.001) and severe head injury (OR, 9.25; 95% CI, 3.0-28.9; P = 0.000) were independent predictors for mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe liver injury, associated severe splenic injury favors early laparotomy and damage control strategy. Patients who arrive in shock or have an associated severe splenic injury should not be managed nonoperatively. In addition to severe head injury, uncontrollable bleeding from the liver injury is still a major cause of early death.

Correlation of operative and pathological injury grade with computed tomographic grade in the failed nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma

BACKGROUND

Computed tomography (CT) is the standard for grading blunt splenic injuries, but the true accuracy, especially for grade IV or V injuries as compared to pathological findings, is unknown.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study from 2005 to 2011 was undertaken.

RESULTS

There were 214 adults admitted with blunt splenic injury and 170 (79%) were managed nonoperatively. The remaining 44 patients (21%) required surgical intervention. There was a significant difference in the Injury Severity Score (ISS) between those who did and those who did not require splenectomy: median 31 (interquartile [IQ] range 11-51) versus 22 (IQ range 9-35, p = 0.0002). Ten patients presented in shock, had a positive ultrasound, and went to surgery. The remaining 34 had CT scans prior to surgery. Twenty-five (73%) had injury grades IV or V. The CT scan correctly graded the injury in 14 (41%) and was incorrect in 20 (59%). The assigned grade by the CT scan underestimated the true injury grade by one grade in six cases (30%), by two or more grades in nine (45%), and the CT images were obscured by blood and deemed "ungradeable" in five (25%). The CT scan was more accurate for grades I and II (100%) than for grades III-V (25-43%). The reasons for inaccuracy were either inability to visualize that the laceration involved the hilar vessels or excessive perisplenic blood which obscured the injury and/or the hilum.

CONCLUSIONS

CT for splenic injury is accurate for grades I and II, but underestimates the true extent of injury for grades III-V. The reasons for the lack of correlation are the inability to determine hilar involvement and excessive perisplenic blood obscuring the injury. Patients with these image characteristics by CT scan should undergo splenectomy earlier if there are any signs of hemodynamic instability.

Optimizing multidetector CT for visualization of splenic vascular injury. Validation by splenic arteriography in blunt abdominal trauma patients

Nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury is the treatment of choice in hemodynamically stable patients. Detection of vascular injury by multidetector CT (MDCT) is the most significant factor predicting the need for endovascular treatment. This study evaluated the timing of the appearance of vascular lesions during angiography. Images from 20 patients embolized for pseudoaneurysms (PSA) were evaluated. Angiograms were reviewed for phase and timing of PSA. Admission MDCT was reviewed for injury grade and PSA. Initial MDCT evaluation indicated grade III and IV splenic injuries in 9 and 11 patients, respectively. PSA was seen on MDCT in 14/20 (70%) patients. Time from opacification of the aorta to vascular injury was 1.32 s for arterial phase injuries compared with 2.05 s for postcapillary injuries (P=0.097). Angiography demonstrated 15 vascular injuries during the arterial and 5 in the venous phase. Of injuries seen during arterial phase angiography, 10/15 (66%) were identified on MDCT. Of the five injuries that exhibited postcapillary-phase findings, 4/5 (80%) demonstrated PSA (P=0.5). Vascular lesions are a better indicator of subsequent clinical deterioration than splenic injury grade. PSAs are more frequently seen in postcapillary vascular injuries than arterial phase lesions with the current timing of MDCT. In a subset of patients in whom splenic injury grades III and IV warrant angiography, PSAs are not initially demonstrated on MDCT. Therefore, alteration of MDCT timing parameters to better correlate with arterial phase angiography may improve initial diagnosis of vascular injury.

Dealing with liver trauma

Bleeding from a traumatic liver injury often ceases spontaneously, which is the basis for non-operative management, currently used in about 80% of patients with blunt hepatic trauma. The selection of patients for non-operative management is based on the assessment of haemodynamic stability and the presence of associated organ injuries requiring surgical repair. In patients requiring surgery, definitive repair is preferred in stable patients with normal tissue perfusion and temperature, and ranges from the use of local haemostats and sutures to non-anatomic hepatic resection and direct repair of juxtahepatic venous injuries. In the most seriously injured patients with major bleeding causing severe physiological derangement, a damage control strategy including perihepatic packing is the treatment method of choice. Adjunctive procedures including hepatic angiography and embolisation are often needed in high-grade liver injuries whether undergoing surgical or non-operative management. The multidisciplinary approach also includes procedures performed for biliary complications, such as percutaneous or endoscopic drainage of bile leaks.

Low-dose MDCT findings of blunt hepatobiliary trauma

This pictorial essay shows low-dose multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) findings of blunt hepatobiliary trauma, and describes the indications and protocol for MDCT. Given the universal usage of MDCT in assessing the liver in blunt abdominal trauma, reduction of patient dose is essential. The new l0se MDCT protocol presented here can achieve up to 50% dose reduction while maintaining diagnostic image quality and thus facilitate dose sensitive patient management. Our institution's blunt hepatobiliary MDCT imaging algorithm can help determine which patients require operative therapy. Injury to the liver is graded on various schemes, one being the Organ Injury Scale devised by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma classification based on the extension of the lesion and bleeding.

Abdominal trauma: from operative to nonoperative management

The nonoperative care of intraabdominal trauma in the polytraumatised patient greatly depends on imaging techniques. The haemodynamically unstable patient should undergo expedient sonography to rule out abdominal haemorrhage. The use of computer tomography (CT) in this difficult patient group is also currently evaluated, however it takes specific amendments to the protocol and institution. In the hemodynamically stable patient however, computer tomography is the modality of choice to evaluate the injured abdomen. Nonoperative treatment can be successful in up to 80% of selected cases. Adjuncts to nonoperative care include embolisation of the spleen and liver in cases of arterial bleeding, and endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreaticography (ERCP) and stenting for injuries to the biliary tree.