When to operate on abdominal stab wounds

The Wandering Knife: A Case Report

Stab injuries to the abdomen have become a common occurrence, though retained objects are rare. A 22-year-old male presented with a left lower abdominal discomfort the next day after having a stab in the right hypochondrium. He was hemodynamically stable, with no signs of peritonitis. Abdominal X-ray revealed a 15 cm long knife blade in the left lower abdomen. He underwent a laparotomy for the removal of the knife blade located inside the peritoneal cavity in his left iliac region without any injury to the surrounding viscera.

Guidelines for the management of haemodynamically stable patients with stab wounds to the anterior abdomen

Clinical practice guidelines have been shown to improve the delivery of care. Anterior abdominal stab wounds, although uncommon, pose a challenge in both rural and urban trauma care. A multidisciplinary working party was established to assist in the development of evidence-based guidelines to answer three key clinical questions: (i) What is the ideal prehospital management of anterior abdominal stab wounds? (ii) What is the ideal management of anterior abdominal stab wounds in a rural or urban hospital without an on-call surgeon? (iii) What is the ideal emergency management of stable patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds when surgical service is available? A systematic review, using Cochrane method, was undertaken. The data were graded by level of evidence as outlined by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. Stable patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds should be transported to the hospital without delay. Any interventions deemed necessary in prehospital care should be undertaken en route to hospital. In rural hospitals with no on-call surgeon, local wound exploration (LWE) may be undertaken by a general practitioner if confident in this procedure. Otherwise or in the presence of obvious fascial penetration, such as evisceration, the patient should be transferred to the nearest main trauma service for further management. In urban hospitals the patient with omental or bowel evisceration or generalized peritonitis should undergo urgent exploratory laparotomy. Stable patients may be screened using LWE. Abdominal computed tomography scan and plain radiographs are not indicated. Obese and/or uncooperative patients require a general anaesthetic for laparoscopy. If there is fascial penetration on LWE or peritoneal penetration on laparoscopy, then an urgent laparotomy should be undertaken. The developed evidence-based guidelines for stable patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds may help minimize unnecessary diagnostic tests and non-therapeutic laparotomy rates.

Unnecessary laparotomy by using physical examination and different diagnostic modalities for penetrating abdominal stab wounds

BACKGROUND

The modern management of penetrating abdominal trauma has decreased the incidence of unnecessary laparotomy by using selective non-operative management protocols. However, the real benefits of physical examination and different diagnostic methods are still unclear.

METHODS

From January 2000 to April 2003, we prospectively collected data on 117 patients with penetrating stab wounds to the thoracoabdominal, anterior abdominal, and back regions who had non-operative management. Clinical examination was the primary tool to differentiate those patients requiring operation. Findings of physical examination, ultrasound, computed tomography, endoscopy, echocardiography, diagnostic peritoneal lavage, and diagnostic laparoscopy were reviewed. The number of therapeutic, non-therapeutic, and negative laparotomies were recorded.

RESULTS

Non-operative management was successful in 79% of patients. There were 11 early (within 8 hours of admission) and 14 delayed (more than 8 hours after admission) laparotomies performed, depending on the results of various diagnostic procedures. Non-operative management failed in 21% of patients, and the rate of non-therapeutic laparotomy in early and delayed laparatomy groups was 9% and 14% respectively. There was no negative laparatomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of physical examination alone and/or together with different diagnostic methods allows reduction of non-therapeutic laparotomies and elimination of negative laparatomies.

Papel da laparoscopia no trauma abdominal penetrante

OBJETIVO: O papel da laparoscopia na redução da taxa de laparotomias não-terapêuticas e da morbidade em pacientes vítimas de trauma abdominal penetrante tem sido amplamente discutido durante os últimos anos. O objetivo do presente estudo é relatar a experiência inicial de um hospital universitário no manejo laparoscópico de pacientes com trauma abdominal penetrante. MÉTODO: Durante um período de três anos, a laparoscopia foi realizada em 37 pacientes vítimas de trauma abdominal penetrante, hemodinamicamente estáveis. Os prontuários médicos foram revisados e os parâmetros analisados foram as indicações do procedimento, lesões associadas, necessidade de conversão, tempo de permanência hospitalar e complicações. RESULTADOS: Houve 18 (48,6%) casos de laparoscopias diagnósticas (LD) positivas e 19 (51,4%) negativas. Dos pacientes com LD positiva, oito (44,4%) foram submetidos à laparotomia exploradora com finalidade terapêutica ou para melhor delineamento da lesão. Houve 10 (55,6%) LD positivas nas quais não foi realizada conversão para cirurgia aberta. Quatro pacientes apresentaram lesões reparáveis laparoscopicamente, sendo realizado hepatorrafia (n=2) e frenorrafia (n=2). Os outros seis pacientes apresentavam lesões isoladas sem sangramento ativo, e a laparotomia não-terapêutica foi evitada. Os pacientes receberam dieta no primeiro dia de pós-operatório e o tempo médio de hospitalização foi de 3,8 dias. CONCLUSÕES: Nossa experiência inicial confirma que a laparoscopia é um bom método de avaliação e tratamento no trauma penetrante. A morbidade relacionada à laparotomias desnecessárias pode ser minimizada quando o procedimento é bem indicado, e o tratamento pode ser realizado com sucesso em casos selecionados.

A Prospective Comparison of the Selective Observation and Routine Exploration Methods for Penetrating Abdominal Stab Wounds With Organ or Omentum Evisceration

BACKGROUND

Both routine laparotomy and selective observation methods have been used in the treatment of penetrating abdominal stab wounds with organ or omentum evisceration. There still are some conflicts about these treatment methods.

METHODS

Between 1998 and 2003, 61 patients treated in the authors' emergency clinic because of penetrating abdominal stab wounds with organ or omentum evisceration were evaluated prospectively. Excepting those with absolute indications for mandatory laparotomy, these patients were treated by either routine laparotomy or selective observation methods. Their prognosis, rates of unnecessary laparotomy, length of hospital stay, and complications were compared using Fisher's exact test and Student's t test.

RESULTS

Nine patients underwent mandatory laparotomy and were therefore excluded from the study. The overall incidence of the patients who had no significant abdominal pathology was 54.1% (33/61). The overall incidence of significant injuries among the asymptomatic patients was 36.5% (19/52). Routine laparotomy was performed for 21 patients, who experienced unnecessary laparotomy and complication rates of 33.33% and 19%, respectively. The mean length of hospital stay in this group was 137.38 +/- 53.25 hours. Of 31 patients, 24 who had been treated by selective observation methods were discharged without laparotomy. The unnecessary laparotomy and complication rates for this group were 6.45% (28.6% for the patients treated surgically) and 3.2%, respectively, whereas the mean length of hospital stay for this group was 81.22 +/- 42.46 hours. There were statistically significant differences in terms of unnecessary laparotomy rates and mean lengths of hospital stay, but no difference in terms of complication rates.

CONCLUSION

The selective observation method is safe and superior to routine laparotomy for the treatment of penetrating abdominal stab wounds with omentum evisceration.

Diagnostic Laparoscopy in Abdominal Stab Wounds: A Prospective, Randomized Study

BACKGROUND

The optimal strategy for identifying patients with abdominal stab wounds requiring surgical repair has not been defined. The potential benefits of diagnostic laparoscopy by incorporating it into the routine diagnostic workup of patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds was evaluated in a two-layer, randomized study.

METHODS

From May 1997 through January 2002, stable patients without peritonitis but with demonstrated peritoneal violation were randomized (A) to exploratory laparotomy (AEL) (n = 23) or diagnostic laparoscopy (ADL) (n = 20). Simultaneously, patients with equivocal peritoneal violation on local wound exploration were randomized (B) to diagnostic laparoscopy (BDL) (n = 28) or expectant nonoperative management (BNOM) (n = 31). Hospital morbidity, length of stay, and costs were primary endpoints, with postdischarge disability being a secondary endpoint.

RESULTS

In patients with peritoneal penetration (AEL vs. ADL), there were minimal differences in the therapeutic operation rate (8 of 23 [AEL] vs. 8 of 20 [ADL], p = 0.761), mortality (none), morbidity (3 of 23 vs. 2 of 20, p = 0.999), hospital stay (mean +/- SD) (5.7 +/- 2.5 vs. 5.1 +/- 4.0 days, p = 0.049), hospital costs (4.6 +/- 1.3 vs. 4.8 +/- 1.9 x 1,000 EUR, p = 0.576), and length of sick leave (34 +/- 12 vs. 29 +/- 11 days, p = 0.305). In patients with equivocal peritoneal penetration (BDL vs. BNOM), laparoscopy found more mostly minor organ injuries (7 of 28 [BDL] vs. 1 of 31 [BNOM], p = 0.022) with no significant difference in therapeutic operations (3 of 28 vs. 1 of 31, p = 0.337) or morbidity (3 of 28 vs. 0 of 31, p = 0.101), but was associated with increased length of stay (2.6 +/- 2.1 vs. 1.9 +/- 1.8 days, p = 0.022), hospital costs (4.2 +/- 1.3 vs. 1.5 +/- 1.1 x 1,000 EUR, p = 0.000), and sick leave requirements (18 of 23 vs. 8 of 28 of eligible patients, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In patients with demonstrated peritoneal violation, laparoscopy offers little benefit over exploratory laparotomy. In patients with equivocal peritoneal penetration on local wound exploration, laparoscopy detects more mostly minor organ injuries than expectant nonoperative management but is associated with increased hospital stay, costs, and sick leave requirements. Overall, diagnostic laparoscopy cannot be recommended as a routine diagnostic tool in anterolateral abdominal and thoracoabdominal stab wounds.