"Zooming" in strategies and outcomes for trauma cases with Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥16: promise or passé?

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: Rescuing severe trauma cases is extremely demanding. The present study purposed to analyze the efficiency of trauma management at Emergency Centre, University Clinical Centre of Serbia, Belgrade, included outcome within 28 days. METHODS: This retrospective study involved 131 intensive care unit trauma cases with total Injury Severity Score ≥16, in terms of administrating the two strategies: (i) definitive surgical repair and (ii) damage control laparotomy. RESULTS: The damage control laparotomy cases revealed statistically higher Injury Severity Score and APACHE II scores, significant brain dysfunction, and hemorrhagic shock on arrival (p<0.001). In addition, the damage control laparotomy had a higher rate of respiratory complications, multiple organ deficiency syndrome, and surgical wound complications (p=0.017, <0.001, and 0.004, respectively), with more days on mechanical ventilation (p=0.003). Overall mortality was 29.8%. Although higher early mortality within ≤24 h in the damage control laparotomy (p=0.021) had been observed, no difference between groups (p=0.172) after the 4th day of hospitalization was detected. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma patients have a high mortality rate in the 1st hours after the incident. Compelling evidence linking host and pathogen factors, such as mitochondrial apoptosis pathways, appears to correlate with loss of organ dysfunction, both cytopathologically and histopathologically. Adequate selection of patients necessitating damage control laparotomy, allowed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery, abdominopelvic trauma classifications, and improvements in resuscitation, may improve the results of severe trauma treatment.

Damage control surgical management of combined small and large bowel injuries in penetrating trauma: Are ostomies still pertinent? / Cirugía de control de daños en lesiones combinadas de intestino delgado y colon en trauma penetrante: ¿Es pertinente el uso de ostomías?

Abstract Hollow viscus injuries represent a significant portion of overall lesions sustained during penetrating trauma. Currently, isolated small or large bowel injuries are commonly managed via primary anastomosis in patients undergoing definitive laparotomy or deferred anastomosis in patients requiring damage control surgery. The traditional surgical dogma of ostomy has proven to be unnecessary and, in many instances, actually increases morbidity. The aim of this article is to delineate the experience obtained in the management of combined hollow viscus injuries of patients suffering from penetrating trauma. We sought out to determine if primary and/or deferred bowel injury repair via anastomosis is the preferred surgical course in patients suffering from combined small and large bowel penetrating injuries. Our experience shows that more than 90% of all combined penetrating bowel injuries can be managed via primary or deferred anastomosis, even in the most severe cases requiring the application of damage control principles. Applying this strategy, the overall need for an ostomy (primary or deferred) could be reduced to less than 10%.

Resumen El trauma de las vísceras huecas representa una gran proporción de las lesiones asociadas al trauma penetrante. Actualmente, las lesiones aisladas de intestino delgado o colon se manejan a través de anastomosis primaria en pacientes sometidos a laparotomía definitiva o anastomosis diferida en pacientes que requieran cirugía de control de daños. El dogma quirúrgico tradicional de la ostomía se ha probado que es innecesario y en muchos casos puede aumentar la morbilidad. El objetivo de este artículo es describir la experiencia obtenida en el manejo de lesiones combinadas de vísceras huecas de pacientes con trauma penetrante. Se determinó que el manejo primario o diferido del intestino a través de anastomosis es el abordaje quirúrgico preferido en pacientes que presentan lesiones penetrantes combinadas de intestino delgado y colon. Se ha reportado que el 90% de lesiones combinadas penetrantes intestinales pueden ser manejadas a través de anastomosis primaria o diferida incluso en los casos más severos requieren la aplicación de los principios de control de daños. Aplicando esta estrategia, la tasa general para ostomía (primaria o diferida) puede ser reducida a menos del 10%.

Damage Control for renal trauma: the more conservative the surgeon, better for the kidney / Control de daños renal: entr e más conservador sea el cirujano mejor para el riñón

Abstract Urologic trauma is frequently reported in patients with penetrating trauma. Currently, the computerized tomography and vascular approach through angiography/embolization are the standard approaches for renal trauma. However, the management of renal or urinary tract trauma in a patient with hemodynamic instability and criteria for emergency laparotomy, is a topic of discussion. This article presents the consensus of the Trauma and Emergency Surgery Group (CTE) from Cali, for the management of penetrating renal and urinary tract trauma through damage control surgery. Intrasurgical perirenal hematoma characteristics, such as if it is expanding or actively bleeding, can be reference for deciding whether a conservative approach with subsequent radiological studies is possible. However, if there is evidence of severe kidney trauma, surgical exploration is mandatory and entails a high probability of requiring a nephrectomy. Urinary tract damage control should be conservative and deferred, because this type of trauma does not represent a risk in acute trauma management.

Resumen El trauma renal y de las vías urinarias se presenta con relativa frecuencia en pacientes con trauma penetrante. El estándar actual de manejo es realizar una evaluación imagenológica, por medio de tomografía computarizada y un abordaje vascular, a través de técnicas de angiografía/embolización. Sin embargo, el manejo de un paciente hemodinámicamente inestable con criterios de laparotomía de emergencia, con hallazgos de trauma renal o de vías urinarias es aún tema de discusión. El siguiente articulo presenta el consenso del grupo de Cirugía de Trauma y Emergencias (CTE) de Cali respecto al manejo del trauma penetrante renal y de vías urinarias mediante cirugía de control de daños. Las características intra quirúrgicas del hematoma perirrenal tales como si es expansivo o si tiene signos de sangrado activo, son puntos de referencia para decidir entre un abordaje conservador, por estudios imagenológicos posteriores. En cambio, si existe la sospecha de un trauma renal severo, se debe realizar exploración quirúrgica con alta probabilidad de una nefrectomía. El manejo de control de daños de las vías urinarias debe ser conservador y diferido, la lesión de estos órganos no representa un riesgo en el manejo agudo del trauma.