Pancreatic and duodenal injuries. complex and lethal

Management of the complex duodenal injury

INTRODUCTION

Complex duodenal trauma is a rare injury with an incidence of 1-4.7% of all abdominal trauma. Historically, varied approaches have been used in the management of these complex injuries and the prevention of complications. This is a review of the current management methodology of complex duodenal injury.

METHODS

A review of the medical literature to include the past and current management of duodenal trauma was performed. Google scholar (1970-2022) and PubMed (1970-2022) were searched using the keywords: complex duodenal trauma, surgical management, and duodenal complications.

DISCUSSION

Complex duodenal trauma can be classified using the AAST grading scale as those encompassing grades III-V. Multiple studies and review articles characterize the difficulty in managing complex duodenal injuries. The tenets of operative management of duodenal trauma include the decision for damage control, resection of non-viable tissue, restoring gastrointestinal continuity, diversion of gastrointestinal contents, bile and pancreatic enzymes, allowing the repair to heal, and providing feeding access. The variety of both historic and current approaches attempt to address these tenets. The incidence of complications are as high as 65% with the most common complications including abscess formation, suture line dehiscence and fistula formation. The overall mortality ranges from 5 to 30%.

CONCLUSIONS

Many different approaches and strategies have been proposed to repair complex duodenal injuries, all of which address important tenets of its management. The risk of complications remains high, therefore, it is vital to have a thoughtful and multidisciplinary approach when treating these injuries.

Duodeno-pancreatic and extrahepatic biliary tree trauma: WSES-AAST guidelines

Duodeno-pancreatic and extrahepatic biliary tree injuries are rare in both adult and pediatric trauma patients, and due to their anatomical location, associated injuries are very common. Mortality is primarily related to associated injuries, but morbidity remains high even in isolated injuries. Optimal management of duodeno-bilio-pancreatic injuries is dictated primarily by hemodynamic stability, clinical presentation, and grade of injury. Endoscopic and percutaneous interventions have increased the ability to non-operatively manage these injuries. Late diagnosis and treatment are both associated to increased morbidity and mortality. Sequelae of late presentations of pancreatic injury and complications of severe pancreatic trauma are also increasingly addressed endoscopically and with interventional radiology procedures. However, for moderate and severe extrahepatic biliary and severe duodeno-pancreatic injuries, immediate operative intervention is preferred as associated injuries are frequent and commonly present with hemodynamic instability or peritonitis. The aim of this paper is to present the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) duodenal, pancreatic, and extrahepatic biliary tree trauma management guidelines.

Outcomes after Distal Pancreatectomy for Trauma in the Modern Era

Multiple stump closure techniques after distal pancreatectomy (DP) for trauma have been described, and all are associated with a significant fistula rate. With increasing emphasis on abbreviated laparotomy, stapled pancreatectomy has become more common. This study describes the outcomes of patients with different closure techniques of the pancreatic stump after resection following pancreatic trauma. Retrospective analysis of 50 trauma patients, who sustained grade III pancreatic injuries with subsequent DP and stapled stump closure, were conducted from 1995 to 2011. Demographic, operative, and outcome data were analyzed to characterize patients, and to directly compare closure techniques. After 12 patients were excluded because of early death (<72 hours), final analyses included 38 patients: 19 (50%) had stapled closure alone and 19 (50%) had stapling with adjunct, including additional closure with sutures, fibrin sealants, or a combination of sutures with fibrin sealants/omental coverage. Twenty-four patients (63%) had postoperative complications, most commonly pancreatic fistula (n = 11, 29%). There were no significant differences with regard to pancreatic fistula or other abdominal complications between closure groups, or were any factors associated with increased likelihood of complications. DP remains a morbid operation after trauma regardless of closure technique. Stapled closure alone is perhaps the method of choice in this setting due to the time constraints directly related to outcomes.

Early endoscopic treatment of blunt traumatic pancreatic injury

Blunt pancreatic trauma is a rare and challenging situation. In many cases, there are other associated injuries that mandate urgent operative treatment. Morbidity and mortality rates are high and complications after acute pancreatic resections are common. The diagnosis of pancreatic injuries can be difficult and often requires multimodal approach including Computed Tomography scans, Magnetic resonance imaging and Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP). The objective of this paper is to review the application of endoprothesis in the settings of pancreatic injury. A review of the English literature available was conducted and the experience of our centre described. While the classical recommended treatment of Grade III pancreatic injury (transection of the gland and the pancreatic duct in the body/tail) is surgical resection this approach carries high morbidity. ERCP was first reported as a diagnostic tool in the settings of pancreatic injury but has in recent years been used increasingly as a treatment option with promising results. This article reviews the literature on ERCP as treatment option for pancreatic injury and adds further to the limited number of cases reported that have been treated early after the trauma.

Review of Pancreaticoduodenal Trauma with a Case Report

Complex anatomical relation of the duodenum, pancreas, biliary tract, and major vessels plays to obscure pancreaticoduodenal injuries. Causes of pancreaticoduodenal injuries are blunt trauma (traffic accidents, sport injuries) in 25 % of cases and penetrating abdominal injuries (stab wounds and firearm injuries) in 75 % of cases. Duodenal injuries are reported to occur in 0.5 to 5 % of all abdominal trauma cases and are observed in 11 % of abdominal firearm wounds, 1.6 % of abdominal stab wounds, and 6 % of blunt trauma. Retroperitoneal and deep abdominal localization of duodenum as an organ contribute to the difficulty in diagnosis and treatment. There are three important major points regarding treatment of duodenal injuries: (1) operation timing and decision, (2) Intraoperative detection, and (3) post-operative care. Therefore, it is difficult to diagnose and treat duodenal trauma. We would like to present a 21-year-old male patient with pancreaticoduodenal injury who presented to our emergency service after firearm injury to his abdomen and discuss his treatment with a short review of related literature.

[Acute abdomen due to complicated intramural duodenal haematoma. Report of a case and review of the literature]

BACKGROUND

Intramural duodenal haematoma is a rare entity that usually occurs in the context of patients with coagulation disorders. A minimum percentage is related to processes such as pancreatitis and pancreatic tumours.

CLINICAL CASE

The case is presented of a 45 year-old male with a history of chronic pancreatitis secondary to alcoholism. He was seen in the emergency room due to abdominal pain, accompanied by toxic syndrome. The abdominal computed tomography reported increased concentric duodenal wall thickness, in the second and third portion. After oesophageal-gastro-duodenoscopy, he presented with haemorrhagic shock. He had emergency surgery, finding a hemoperitoneum, duodenopancreatic tumour with intense inflammatory component, as well a small bowel perforation of third duodenal portion. A cephalic duodenopancreatectomy was performed with pyloric preservation and reconstruction with Roux-Y.

DISCUSSION

Treatment of a duodenal haematoma is nasogastric decompression, blood transfusion and correction of coagulation abnormalities. Surgery is indicated in the cases in which there is no improvement after 2 weeks of treatment, or there is suspicion of malignancy or major complications arise.

CONCLUSIONS

Duodenal intramural haematoma secondary to chronic pancreatitis is rare, although the diagnosis should be made with imaging and, if suspected, start conservative treatment and surgery only in complicated cases.

Combined gastric and duodenal perforation through blunt abdominal trauma

Blunt abdominal traumas are uncommonly encountered despite their high prevalence, and injuries to the organ like duodenum are relatively uncommon (occurring in only 3%-5% of abdominal injuries) because of its retroperitoneal location. Duodenal injury combined with gastric perforation from a single abdominal trauma impact is rarely heard. The aim of this case report is to present a rare case of blunt abdominal trauma with combined gastric and duodenal injuries.

Complex penetrating duodenal injuries: less is better

BACKGROUND

The traditional management of complex penetrating duodenal trauma (PDT) has been the use of elaborate temporizing and complex procedures such as the pyloric exclusion and duodenal diverticulization. We sought to determine whether a simplified surgical approach to the management of complex PDT injuries improves clinical outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all consecutive PDT from 2003 to 2012 was conducted. Patients were divided into three groups according to a simplified surgical algorithm devised following the local experience at a regional Level I trauma center. Postoperative duodenal leaks were drained externally either via traditional anterior drainage or via posterior "retroperitoneal laparostomy" as an alternate option.

RESULTS

There were 44 consecutive patients with PDT, and 41 of them (93.2%) were from gunshot wounds. Seven patients were excluded owing to early intraoperative death secondary to associated devastating traumatic injuries. Of the remaining 36 patients, 7 (19.4%) were managed with single-stage primary duodenal repair with definitive abdominal wall fascial closure (PDR + NoDC group). Damage-control laparotomy was performed in 29 patients, (80.5%) in which primary repair was performed in 15 (51.7%) (PDR + DC group), and the duodenum was over sewn and left in discontinuity in 14 (48.3%). Duodenal reconstruction was performed after primary repair in 2 of 15 cases and after left in discontinuity in 13 of 14 cases (DR + DC group). The most common complication was the development of a duodenal fistula in 12 (33%) of 36 cases. These leaks were managed by traditional anterior drainage in 9 (75%) of 12 cases and posterior drainage by retroperitoneal laparostomy in 3 (25%) of 12 cases. The duodenal fistula closed spontaneously in 7 (58.3%) of 12 cases. The duodenum-related mortality rate was 2.8%, and the overall mortality rate was 11.1%.

CONCLUSION

An application of basic damage-control techniques for PDT leads to improved survival and an acceptable incidence of complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, level IV.

Pancreatic trauma

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic trauma occurs in approximately 4% of all patients sustaining abdominal injuries. The pancreas has an intimate relationship with the major upper abdominal vessels, and there is significant morbidity and mortality associated with severe pancreatic injury. Immediate resuscitation and investigations are essential to delineate the nature of the injury, and to plan further management. If main pancreatic duct injuries are identified, specialised input from a tertiary hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) team is advised.

METHODS

A comprehensive online literature search was performed using PubMed. Relevant articles from international journals were selected. The search terms used were: 'pancreatic trauma', 'pancreatic duct injury', 'radiology AND pancreas injury', 'diagnosis of pancreatic trauma', and 'management AND surgery'. Articles that were not published in English were excluded. All articles used were selected on relevance to this review and read by both authors.

RESULTS

Pancreatic trauma is rare and associated with injury to other upper abdominal viscera. Patients present with non-specific abdominal findings and serum amylase is of little use in diagnosis. Computed tomography is effective in diagnosing pancreatic injury but not duct disruption, which is most easily seen on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography or operative pancreatography. If pancreatic injury is suspected, inspection of the entire pancreas and duodenum is required to ensure full evaluation at laparotomy. The operative management of pancreatic injury depends on the grade of injury found at laparotomy. The most important prognostic factor is main duct disruption and, if found, reconstructive options should be determined by an experienced HPB surgeon.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of pancreatic trauma requires a high index of suspicion and detailed imaging studies. Grading pancreatic injury is important to guide operative management. The most important prognostic factor is pancreatic duct disruption and in these cases, experienced HPB surgeons should be involved. Complications following pancreatic trauma are common and the majority can be managed without further surgery.

Prognosis and treatment of pancreaticoduodenal traumatic injuries: which factors are predictors of outcome?

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Abdominal trauma rarely causes injuries involving the duodenum and pancreas. Associated injuries occur in 46% of all pancreatic injuries. The morbidity and mortality of pancreaticoduodenal injuries remain high.

METHODS

The present study is a retrospective review of our experience from 1989 to 2008 in the surgical treatment of traumatic pancreaticoduodenal injuries. Mortality, morbidity, prognostic factors, and the value of surgical techniques were analyzed.

RESULTS

In our level I Trauma Center, between 1989 and 2008, 55 patients had a pancreaticoduodenal injury. In 68.5% of cases pancreatic injuries were found, 20.4% had duodenal injury, and 11.1% suffered combined pancreaticoduodenal injuries; 85.3% of the patients had blunt abdominal trauma, while 14.9% had penetrating injuries. We treated 78.1% of the patients with external drainage and/or simple suture; distal pancreatectomy was performed in 9% of cases and duodenal resection with anastomosis (3.7%) and diversion procedures (3.7%) were performed in an equal number of patients. Age, American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grade, organ involved, hemodynamic status, intraoperative cardiac arrest, and operative time remained strongly predictive of mortality on multivariate analysis. The AAST grade represented, on multivariate analysis, the only independent prognostic factor predictive of overall morbidity. In the past decade we have used feeding jejunostomy more frequently, with a reduction of mortality and operating time, due also to a better approach from a dedicated trauma team.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal management and better outcome of pancreaticoduodenal injuries seem to be associated with shorter operative time, and with simple and fast damage control surgery (DCS), in contrast to definitive surgical procedures.

[Trauma of pancreas: predictor's factors of morbidity and mortality related to trauma index]

CONTEXT

Although relatively uncommon, traumatic pancreatic injury is associated with significant morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To define the predictors' factors of increase in the morbidity and mortality in patients with pancreatic trauma.

METHOD

In this casuistic 131 patients were studied, since January 1994 through December 2007, with theirs epidemiological, physiological and anatomic parameters compared and the analysis of the predictive values for the occurrence of bad evolution, with an appropriate statistical study.

RESULTS

Penetrating trauma occurred in 64% and blunt trauma in 36%, and 91.6% was male. The mean age was 29,8 years. The global morbidity in this series was 64.9% with 29% prevalence of pancreas related complications, such as pancreatic fistula and bleeding occurrence. The overall mortality was 27.5% and occurred by hemorrhagic shock and multiple organs and system failed.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher morbidity and mortality was related with complex injuries of the pancreas (grade IV and V), but morbidity and mortality in the group of injuries grade I and II are not minimal in patients with changed values of revised trauma score and high values of injury severity score and abdominal trauma index. Systolic blood pressure lower 90 mm Hg, changed values of revised trauma score index, values of injury severity score higher 15 and values of abdominal trauma index higher 25 are predictive factors of morbidity. Changed values of revised trauma score, values of injury severity score or abdominal trauma index higher 25, systolic blood pressure are predictive factors of mortality in patients with pancreatic trauma. Low values of TRISS are predictive of higher morbidity and mortality, but high values of TRISS are not predictives of satisfactory evolution.

A heuristic approach and heretic view on the technical issues and pitfalls in the management of penetrating abdominal injuries

There is a general decline in penetrating abdominal trauma throughout the western world. As a result of that, there is a significant loss of expertise in dealing with this type of injury particularly when the patient presents to theatre with physiological instability. A significant percentage of these patients will not be operated by a trauma surgeon but, by the "occasional trauma surgeon", who is usually trained as a general surgeon. Most general surgeons have a general knowledge of operating penetrating trauma, knowledge originating from their training years and possibly enhanced by reading operative surgery textbooks. Unfortunately, the details included in most of these books are not extensive enough to provide them with enough armamentaria to tackle the difficult case. In this scenario, their operative dexterity and knowledge cannot be compared to that of their trauma surgeon colleagues, something that is taken for granted in the trauma textbooks. Techniques that are considered basic and easy by the trauma surgeons can be unfamiliar and difficult to general surgeons. Knowing the danger points and pitfalls that will be encountered in penetrating trauma to the abdomen, will help the occasional trauma surgeons to avoid intraoperative errors and improve patient care. This manuscript provides a heuristic approach from surgeons working in a high volume penetrating trauma centers in South African. Some of the statements could be considered heretic by the "accepted" trauma literature. We believe that this heuristic ("rule of thumb" approach, that originating from "try and error" experience) can help surgical trainees or less experienced in penetrating trauma surgeons to improve their surgical decision making and technique, resulting in better patient outcome.

Safety of repair for severe duodenal injuries

BACKGROUND

There is ongoing debate about the management of severe duodenal injuries (SDIs), and earlier studies have recommended pyloric exclusion. The objective of this study was to compare primary repair with pyloric exclusion to examine if primary repair can be safely used in SDIs.

METHODS

The medical records of 193 consecutive patients who were admitted between August 1992 and January 2004 with duodenal injuries were reviewed. After excluding early deaths (n = 50), low-grade duodenal injuries (n = 81), and pancreatoduodenectomies for catastrophic trauma (n = 12), a total of 50 patients with SDIs (grade III, IV, or V) were analyzed. Primary repair (PR--simple duodenorrhaphy or resection and primary anastomosis) was performed in 34 (68%) and pyloric exclusion (PE) in 16 (32%). Characteristics and outcomes of these two groups were compared.

RESULTS

PE and PR patients were similar for age, injury severity score, abdominal abbreviated injury score, physiologic status on admission, time to operation, and most abdominal organs injured. PE patients had more pancreatic injuries (63% vs. 24%, p < 0.01), a higher frequency of injuries to the first and second part of the duodenum (79% vs. 42%, p = 0.02), and a nonsignificant trend toward more grade IV and V injuries (37% vs. 18%, p = 0.11). There was no difference in morbidity (including complications specific to the duodenal repair), mortality, and intensive care unit and hospital length of stay between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Pyloric exclusion is not necessary for all patients with SDIs, as previously suggested. Selected SDI patients can be safely managed by simple primary repair.