Conservative versus operative management in stable patients with penetrating abdominal trauma: the experience of a Canadian level 1 trauma centre

Selective nonoperative versus operative management of liver gunshot injuries: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Experience accumulated over the last decades suggests nonoperative management (NOM) of civilian gunshot liver injuries can be safely applied in selected cases. This study aims to compare the outcomes of selective NOM versus operative management (OM) of patients sustaining gunshot wounds (GSW) to the liver.

METHODS

A registry-based retrospective cohort analysis was performed for the period of 2008 to 2016 in a Brazilian trauma referral. Patients aged 16-80 years sustaining civilian GSW to right-sided abdominal quadrants and liver injury were included. Baseline data, vital signs, grade of liver injury, associated injuries, injury severity scores, blood transfusion requirements, liver- and non-liver-related complications, length-of-stay (LOS), and mortality were retrieved from individual registries.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients were eligible for analysis, of which 37 underwent NOM and 17 underwent OM. The median age was 25 years and all were male. No statistically significant differences were observed between groups regarding patients' demographics, injury scores, grade of liver injury and associated lesions. NOM patients tended to sustain higher-grade injuries (86.5% vs 64.7%; p = 0.08), and failure of conservative management was recorded in two (5.4%) cases. The rate of complications was 48% with no between-group statistically significant difference. Blood transfusion requirements were significantly higher in the OM group (58.8% vs 21.6%; p = 0.012). The median LOS was seven days. No deaths were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Patients with liver GSW who are haemodynamically stable and without peritonitis are candidates for NOM. In this study, NOM was safe and effective even in high-grade injuries.

Outcomes of Nonoperative Management of Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Injury: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

The treatment of penetrating abdominal injuries has changed in recent years with more focus on "nonoperative management" (NOM) to avoid unnecessary laparotomies while identifying injuries early. Although the NOM approach is widely used for stab wounds, its effectiveness in managing abdominal gunshot wounds is controversial. NOM of penetrating abdominal injuries is becoming more dependent on hemodynamic stability and improved noninvasive radiological interventions. The role of NOM is significantly underreported and underestimated in developing countries, particularly in fragile and conflict-affected states such as Yemen. The present study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of NOM in penetrating abdominal trauma injury patients and identify factors associated with NOM failure in a low-resource setting.

METHODS

A retrospective study from January 2021 to December 2022 including patients diagnosed with penetrating abdominal trauma at the General Military Hospital, Sana'a, Yemen, was conducted. Hemodynamically stable patients without peritonitis or clear indications for immediate laparotomy were candidates for NOM and were included in the study. Patients with blunt abdominal injuries, penetrating wounds outside the abdomen, particularly head injury, eviscerated structures, and gastrointestinal hemorrhage, or those pronounced dead on arrival were excluded. The primary outcome was the success and failure rate of NOM necessitating laparotomy. The secondary outcome was the factors associated with NOM failure.

RESULTS

During the study, 256 patients with penetrating abdominal injury were admitted, with 222 (86.7%) undergoing immediate laparotomy and 34 (13.3%) treated with NOM. The mean age was 27.6±7.4 years. Bump explosions, mostly sharp objects (secondary blast injuries), were the main causes of injury (n=18, 52.9%). Other causes were low-velocity gunshot wounds, stab wound injuries, and shotgun injuries in 14 (41.2%), one (2.9%), and one (2.9%), respectively. The majority of patients (n=25, 55.9%) were admitted within 6-24 hours of the incident. The abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan revealed various injuries in all patients, including hemoperitoneum in 11 (32.4%), pneumoperitoneum in five (14.7%), liver injury in 15 (44.1%), foreign body attached to the wall colon in 23 (67.6%), kidney injury in two (5.9%), and splenic injury in one (2.9%). NOM was successful in 31 (91.2%) patients. NOM failed in three (8.8%). One patient was treated via the laparoscopic procedure, and two patients were treated with laparotomy procedures. Five (14.7%) cases required intensive care unit (ICU) admission, with no deaths or major complications. In univariate analysis, the presence of free intra-abdominal fluid (pneumoperitoneum) on the initial CT scan and the need for ICU admission were associated with NOM failure and were statistically significant (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support that some penetrating abdominal trauma patients can benefit from NOM. The goal of preventing unnecessary laparotomies should be aligned with a comprehensive comprehension of the clinical signs and symptoms of NOM failure and the necessity for surgical intervention. Serial abdominal examinations remain the foundation of selected NOM; nevertheless, radiological and laboratory tests can be important tools in decision-making. In this study, free intra-abdominal fluid on the initial CT scan and the need for ICU admission were associated with NOM failure.

Accuracy of CT Scan for Detecting Hollow Viscus Injury in Penetrating Abdominal Trauma

BACKGROUND

In penetrating abdominal trauma, computed tomography (CT) is routinely performed to evaluate stable patients for selective non-operative management (SNOM). Triple-contrast CT (oral, rectal, and IV) has traditionally been used. However, due to its disadvantages, most trauma centres, including our unit at the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital (CMJAH), now perform single-contrast intravenous-only CT scans. We performed a retrospective review to determine the accuracy of single-contrast CT scans for detecting hollow viscus injuries (HVI) in penetrating abdominal trauma.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who presented to CMJAH with penetrating abdominal injuries was performed between 01 August 2017 and 31 August 2019 and were evaluated for SNOM with CT (IV contrast only). Patient records were reviewed to determine pertinent demographics, mechanism, and site of injury, as well as metabolic parameters. CT findings were compared to findings at laparotomy.

RESULTS

A total of 437 patients met the inclusion criteria. The majority were male (92.7%), with a mean age of 31.5 yrs (SD 8.7). Injuries were predominantly due to stab wounds (72,5%, n = 317). CT scan was negative in 342 patients, of which 314 completed SNOM successfully. A total of 93 patients proceeded to laparotomy. CT had a sensitivity of 95.1%, specificity of 44.2%, positive predictive value of 57.4%, and negative predictive value of 92%.

CONCLUSION

Single-contrast CT in penetrating abdominal trauma is a valuable investigative tool in identifying patients for SNOM. Features of HVI on single-contrast CT are not very specific and should be interpreted along with other clinical factors including wound trajectory and serial abdominal examinations. Other associated injuries such as diaphragmatic and solid organ injuries should be considered in the final management plan.

Comparative Study between Operative and Conservative Management of Penetrating Anterior Abdominal Stab Injuries

Background: Presently, non-operative management of penetrating abdominal stab injuries has been standardized in several trauma centers. This strategy has appromising outcome conserving decreasing morbidity. Aim of the work: This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of SNOM of patients having penetrating abdominal stab injuries not indicating emergent laparotomy and  to identify a protocol for selection of patient candidates for non-operative management in a tertiary care hospital in Egypt. Patients & Methods: This is a prospective study that involved patients who presented to the casualty department of Kasr Elainy teaching Hospital, in the period from August 2018 to August 2020, for management of a penetrating abdominal Stab injuries. Fully conscious, haemodynimacally stable patients were included. Eligible patients were allocated to either SNOM group or immediate operative management (IOM) group. Results: SNOM group included64 patients and IOM group included 40 patients. The age of the patients ranged from 16 to 49 years with a mean of 33±6.8 years, and the majority were males (99%). SNOM failed in 4/69 patients (5.7%) who required delayed laparotomy for peritonitis (2 cases) and HB drop and haemodynamic instability (2 cases). In IOM group, only 3 cases had therapeutic laparotomies (7.3%). The remaining cases had unnecessary laparotomies (92.7%). Statistically significant higher LOS was seen in SNOM group (p<0.05). However, less unnecessary laparotomies and lower incidences of complications were noted (p<0.01). Conclusion: vital signs together with abdominal examination are the most important clinical criteria in decision making in penetrating abdominal stab injury patients  When surgery is not absolutely indicated, SNOM is a safe and feasible approach in management of penetrating abdominal stab injury by following proper management algorithm and selection criteria.

Role of conservative management in low energy transfer penetrating shotgun abdominal injuries

Background and aims

Penetrating abdominal trauma can be caused by a variety of weapons which require different management protocols. After a long era of mandatory laparotomy for abdominal gunshot wounds, the concept of selective laparotomy and conservative management in the form of serial observations has been introduced in some centers. This study aims to assess the feasibility and safety of conservative management and close observation of victims of low energy transfer shotgun penetrating abdominal injury.

Methods

A prospective cohort study of hemodynamically stable patients who had sustained low energy transfer shotgun injuries to the abdomen who presented to the surgical emergency department of Cairo University Hospitals from May 2016 to January 2019. They were subjected to a conservative management and follow-up protocol.

Results

A total of 250 patients (167 males and 83 females) were included. The conservative management protocol was successful in 217/250 patients (86.8%), unsuccessful in 22 patients (8.8%) where abdominal exploration was done either open or laparoscopically. Delayed diagnosis of bowel injury occurred in one patient (0.4%). There was one death (0.4%) and abdominal exploration was negative in 10 (4%) patients.

Conclusion

We recommend this conservative protocol for the victims of low energy transfer penetrating shotgun injuries which may save many patients from the morbidities of unnecessary laparotomy. We accept that the injury pattern may not be sufficiently common in many countries to allow comfort with this non-operative approach.

[Penetrating abdominal trauma]

The management of patients with penetrating abdominal trauma has significantly changed in recent years. While exploratory laparotomy was the gold standard in Germany in all patients up to the 1970s, selective nonoperative management (SNOM) is increasingly being discussed in hemodynamically stable patients without pathological findings in computed tomography (CT) scan or extended focussed assessment with sonography for trauma (eFAST). A standard algorithm taking a balance between invasiveness, patient safety and the use of resources into account has still to be implemented in Germany. The presented algorithm includes an immediate laparotomy in hemodynamically unstable patients as damage control surgery followed by a second look procedure after 48 h. Hemodynamically stable patients should primarily undergo diagnostic laparoscopy and be treated by early total care surgery, depending on the clinical and diagnostic imaging findings. Patients without clinical symptoms or pathological findings in imaging studies should be treated according to SNOM with close clinical controls.

Selective nonoperative management of penetrating abdominal trauma at a level 1 Canadian trauma centre: a quest for perfection

Background

Many patients who sustain penetrating abdominal trauma can be managed nonoperatively. The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) has published guidelines on selective nonoperative management (SNOM), and this approach is well established. The purpose of this study is to assess the management of penetrating abdominal trauma, including the selection of patients for SNOM and the use of this approach, at a Canadian level 1 trauma centre.

Methods

We used the Hamilton Health Sciences trauma registry to compile data on patients aged 16 years and older who sustained penetrating abdominal trauma from Jan. 1, 2011, to Dec. 31, 2017. Hemodynamically stable, nonperitonitic patients without evisceration or impalement were considered potentially eligible for SNOM. We compared the SNOM group of patients with the immediate operative (IOR) group. Our primary outcome was SNOM failure; secondary outcomes included length of stay, repeat imaging, computed tomography (CT) protocol, laparoscopy in left thoracoabdominal trauma, and nontherapeutic and negative laparotomies.

Results

We included 191 patients with penetrating abdominal trauma; 123 underwent SNOM and 68 underwent IOR. Of the 68 patients in the IOR group, 4 underwent nontherapeutic laparotomies. Of the 123 patients in the SNOM group, this approach failed in 7 (5.7%). Patients who were successfully managed with SNOM had an average length of stay of 25.4 hours (7.9–43.0 h), with no repeat imaging in 34/35 (97.1%). Only 5 of the 47 patients with flank/back wounds had a CT scan that included luminal contrast. Only 3 of the 58 patients with left thoracoabdominal wounds underwent same-admission laparoscopy, all demonstrating diaphragmatic defects.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates a high rate of compliance with the EAST SNOM guidelines, including minimal failure rate of SNOM and an efficient use of resources as demonstrated by reduced length of stay and minimal use of reimaging. We identified 2 opportunities for improvement: improved use of luminal contrast CT in patients with flank/back wounds and improved use of diagnostic laparoscopy in patients with left thoracoabdominal wounds.

Changes in Approach to Solid Organ Injury: What the Radiologist Needs to Know

This review aims to examine the challenges facing radiologists interpreting trauma computed tomography (CT) images in this era of a changing approach to management of solid organ trauma. After reviewing the pearls and pitfalls of CT imaging protocols for detection of traumatic solid organ injuries, we describe the key changes in the 2018 American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Organ Injury Scales for liver, spleen, and kidney and their implications for management strategies. We then focus on the important imaging findings in observed in patients who undergo nonoperative management and patients who are imaged post damage control surgery.

Diagnostic laparoscopy or selective non-operative management for stable patients with penetrating abdominal trauma: What to choose?

Background

Selective non-operative management (NOM) and diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) are well-accepted approaches in the management of stable patients with penetrating abdominal trauma (PAT). The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of early DL in stable asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic patients with PAT as opposed to NOM, a standard of care in this scenario. The secondary aim was to suggest possible indications for DL.

Methods

Patients managed with DL or NOM over a 12-month period were included in this study. The age, gender, mechanism and location of injuries, trauma scores, haemodynamic and metabolic parameters, intraoperative findings and length of hospital stay (LOS) were recorded and correlated with outcomes.

Results

Thirty-six patients were in the NOM group and 35 in the DL group. Stab wounds were more common. The most common location of injury was the anterior abdominal wall in the NOM group and the lower chest in the DL group. Computed tomography (CT) scan was performed more often in the NOM group (75% vs. 17.1%). The injury severity score (ISS), New ISS and PAT Index were higher in the DL group. Nearly 23 (66%) patients in the DL group had a penetration of the peritoneum, but no significant abdominal injuries. LOS in the NOM group was 2 days versus 3.1 days in the DL group. There were no missed injuries, complications or mortality.

Conclusion

NOM is a preferred modality for minimally symptomatic stable patients. However, there is a risk of missed injuries and delayed treatment. DL accurately visualizes injuries, decreases unnecessary CT scans and avoids nontherapeutic laparotomies.

Accuracy of Computed Tomography in Diagnosis of Intra-abdominal Injuries in Stable Patients With Anterior Abdominal Stab Wounds: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Workup for patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) following an anterior abdominal stab wound (AASW) has been debated since the 1960s. Experts agree that patients with peritonitis, evisceration, or hemodynamic instability should undergo immediate laparotomy (LAP); however, workup of stable, asymptomatic or nonperitoneal patients is not clearly defined.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to evaluate the accuracy of computed tomography of abdomen and pelvis (CTAP) for diagnosis of intraabdominal injuries requiring therapeutic laparotomy (THER-LAP) in ED patients with AASW. Is a negative CT scan without a period of observation sufficient to safely discharge a hemodynamically stable, asymptomatic AASW patient?

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from their inception until May 2017 for studies on ED patients with AASW. We defined the reference standard test as LAP for patients who were managed surgically and inpatient observation in those who were managed nonoperatively. In those who underwent LAP, THER-LAP was considered as disease positive. We used the Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) to evaluate the risk of bias and assess the applicability of the included studies. We attempted to compute the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and negative likelihood ratio (LR-) using a random-effects model with MetaDiSc software and calculate testing and treatment thresholds for CT scan applying the Pauker and Kassirer model.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included encompassing 575 patients. The weighted prevalence of THER-LAP was 34.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 30.5%-38.2%). Studies had variable quality and the inclusion criteria were not uniform. The operating characteristics of CT scan were as follows: sensitivity = 50% to 100%, specificity = 39% to 97%, LR+ = 1.0 to 15.7, and LR- = 0.07 to 1.0. The high heterogeneity (I²  > 75%) of the operating characteristics of CT scan prevented pooling of the data and therefore the testing and treatment thresholds could not be estimated.

DISCUSSION

The articles revealed a high prevalence (8.7%, 95% CI = 6.1%-12.2%) of injuries requiring THER-LAP in patients with a negative CT scan and almost half (47%, 95% CI = 30%-64%) of those injuries involved the small bowel.

CONCLUSIONS

In stable AASW patients, a negative CT scan alone without an observation period is inadequate to exclude significant intraabdominal injuries.

Hematomas in Tiger Territory

A 26-year-old man presented with gunshot wound to the epigastrium. At surgery, he was hemodynamically stable and had a tense hematoma with thrill in zone 2 (right side) and porta triad. After liver injury was controlled, he underwent percutaneous stenting of a renal artery-vena cava fistula and the hepatic artery injury was followed. Historically, penetrating injury to zone 2 has mandated operative exploration. However, with the advent of endovascular options, in stable patients, catheter-based options offer a reasonable alternative with less risk of blood loss and possible nephrectomy. Renal artery stenting has been advocated for renal artery cava fistulas. The role of timing, hybrid operating suites, and traditional operative exposure will vary based on presentation and institutional capabilities.