Classification of liver and pancreatic trauma

The liver is the most frequently injured intra-abdominal organ and associated injury to other organs increases the risk of complications and death. This has highlighted the critical need for an accurate classification system as a basis for the clinical decision-making process. Several classification systems have been proposed in an attempt to incorporate the aetiology, anatomy and extent of injury and correlate it with subsequent clinical management and outcome. The widely accepted Organ Injury Scale is based on anatomical criteria that quantify the disruption of the liver parenchyma and defines six groups which may influence management strategies and relate to outcome. The less common pancreatic injury remains a major source of morbidity and mortality due to the likelihood of associated solid or hollow-organ injuries. The implication of a delay in diagnosis and management emphasizes the need for an accurate classification system. The Organ Injury Scale is widely used for pancreas trauma and recognizes the importance of progressive parenchymal injury and in particular ductal injury. Advances in imaging techniques have led to the development of newer radiological classification systems; however, validation of their accuracy remains to be proven. An accurate classification of liver and pancreatic trauma is fundamental for the development of treatment protocols in which clinical decisions are based on the severity of injury.

Validation of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Organ Injury Scale for Penetrating Colon Injuries

In 2020, the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) published a revision of the organ injury scale (OIS) for bowel injuries. The update included for the first time a separate OIS for penetrating colon injuries as well as imaging criteria. To validate the new OIS and its correlation with outcomes, we performed a retrospective review of patients with penetrating colon injuries (AIS<3 in other body regions) between 2016 and 2020 at a single institution. Sixty-six patients met inclusion criteria. Most were young (29 years median) and male (90%). All underwent operative intervention and 23 (34%) had pre-operative imaging. Imaging grade was higher than operative grade in 11 patients (48%). Higher AAST operative grade was associated with a higher likelihood of resection and anastomosis or colostomy, need for damage control laparotomy, and development of intra-abdominal abscess and acute kidney injury. A multicenter study is underway to confirm these findings.