A review of upper extremity fasciotomies in a level I trauma center.

The purpose of this study was to review recent experience with upper extremity fasciotomy. This study is a retrospective review of injured patients undergoing fasciotomy in the upper extremity at an urban trauma center. Mechanisms of injury, indications for and timing of fasciotomy, role of compartment pressures, techniques of closure, amputation rate, and patient outcomes were collected. Over a 3-year period, 201 fasciotomies were performed in the extremities of 157 injured patients, including 37 in the upper extremities of 27 patients. The mechanisms of injury were penetrating trauma in 13 patients (10 GSW, three SW), blunt or crush in 9, and burns (4 electric, 1 flame) in 5. Vascular injuries and fractures were present in 15 (56%) and 9 (33%) patients, respectively. The decision to perform a fasciotomy was a clinical one in 21 patients (75%), and only 6 patients had compartment pressures measured (range, 40-87 mm Hg; mean, 52). Upper extremity fasciotomy was performed at a first operation in 24 patients, whereas only 3 patients had a delayed fasciotomy from 6 to 48 hours after injury. Two patients died on the first hospital day, and 5 others had an amputation of an upper extremity at a mean of 8 days (range 2 to 26) after injury; however, no amputation was due to the failure to perform a timely fasciotomy. In the remaining 20 patients, closure of the fasciotomy site was performed at a mean of 9 days (range, 2 to 22) after injury, most commonly by split thickness skin grafting. Hospital stay was a mean of 20 days (range, 7-35). We conclude that 1) upper extremity fasciotomy accounts for less than 20 per cent of all fasciotomies performed; 2) a clinical decision is the most common reason for performing upper extremity fasciotomy, and only 11 per cent of patients underwent a delayed fasciotomy in this review; 3) the need for upper extremity fasciotomy is associated with a length of stay longer than expected for overall injury severity.

Management and short-term patency of lower extremity venous injuries with various repairs.

BACKGROUND: Although several methods of repair of extremity venous injuries have been shown to be efficacious, patency rates have varied significantly from center to center. METHODS: A retrospective review was made of treatment outcomes of adult and pediatric patients with major venous injuries of the lower extremity. RESULTS: From 1997 to 2002, 82 patients sustained 86 major lower extremity venous injuries. Venous injuries were treated with primary repair in 27, complex repair in 37 (autogenous vein, 10, and ringed polytetrafluoroethylene [PTFE], 27) and ligation in 20. Prior to repair, temporary intraluminal venous shunts were used in 18 patients. Follow-up duplex imaging or venography or both were performed on 42 extremities at a mean of 10.9 +/- 7.1 days after repair with an overall patency rate of 73.8% (primary repair 76.5%; autogenous vein graft 66.7%; and PTFE 73.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Overall early patency rate of venous repairs performed by an experienced trauma team is similar irrespective of the type of repair. The use of temporary intraluminal shunts is acceptable in selected circumstances, while ringed PTFE grafts are reasonable alternatives when the contralateral saphenous vein is too small.

Changing patterns in the management of penetrating abdominal trauma: the more things change, the more they stay the same.

BACKGROUND: Damage control surgery (DCS) and treatment of abdominal compartment syndrome have had major impacts on care of the severely injured. The objective of this study was to see whether advances in critical care, DCS, and recognition of abdominal compartment syndrome have improved survival from penetrating abdominal injury (PAI). METHODS: The care of 250 consecutive patients requiring laparotomy for PAI (1997-2000) was reviewed retrospectively. Organ injury patterns, survival, and use of DCS and its impact on outcome were compared with a similar experience reported in 1988. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty patients had a positive laparotomy for PAI. Twenty-seven (10.8%) required abdominal packing and 45 (17.9%) did not have fascial closure. Seven (2.8%) required emergency department thoracotomy and 21 (8.4%) required operating room thoracotomy. Two hundred seventeen (86.8%) survived overall. Small bowel (47.2%), colon (36.4%), and liver (34.4%) were most often injured. Mortality was associated with the number of organs injured (odds ratio, 1.98; 95% confidence interval, 1.65-2.37; p < 0.001). Vascular injury was a risk factor for mortality (p < 0.001), as was need for DCS (p < 0.001), emergency department thoracotomy (p < 0.001), and operating room thoracotomy (p < 0.001). Seventy-nine percent of deaths occurred within 24 hours from refractory hemorrhagic shock. DCS was used in 17.9% (n = 45) versus 7.0% (n = 21) in 1988, with a higher survival rate (73.3% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.001). DCS was associated with significant morbidity including sepsis (42.4%, p < 0.001), intra-abdominal abscess (18.2%, p = 0.009), and gastrointestinal fistula (18.2%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Penetrating abdominal organ injury patterns and survival from PAI have remained similar over the past decade. Death from refractory hemorrhagic shock in the first 24 hours remains the most common cause of mortality. DCS and the open abdomen are being used more frequently with improved survival but result in significant morbidity.

Traumatic rupture of the urinary bladder: is the suprapubic tube necessary?

BACKGROUND: Although surgical principles are well accepted for the treatment of an intraperitoneal or extraperitoneal rupture of the urinary bladder, the type and number of drainage catheters needed to obtain a satisfactory outcome with minimal patient morbidity have yet to be determined. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of data on injured patients with the diagnosis of an intraperitoneal or extraperitoneal rupture of the urinary bladder from penetrating or blunt trauma. RESULTS: Of the 51 patients identified, 28 were treated with suprapubic and transurethral catheters, whereas 23 received a transurethral catheter only. Complications and catheter duration times were similar regardless of type of bladder injury or drainage catheter used (p > 0.5). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that there are similar outcomes and complication rates for patients treated with suprapubic and transurethral catheters versus transurethral catheter only. Transurethral catheters alone seem effective in draining all types of bladder injuries.

Three hundred consecutive emergent celiotomies in general surgery patients: influence of advanced diagnostic imaging techniques and procedures on diagnosis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the utility of advanced tests performed before surgery on patients who needed emergent abdominal operations, and to assess the outcomes of these patients relative to their diagnoses. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Patients with a potential abdominal catastrophe may have various presentations, contributing to the difficulty of the decision about whether an operation is indicated. Advanced tests can be valuable, but the use of these adjuncts should be appropriate to the clinical status of the patient so that treatment is not delayed. The role of these tools in the evaluation of the patient who may need an emergent abdominal operation is less well defined. METHODS: Data were reviewed on adult patients undergoing emergent abdominal operations. Entrance criteria included patients who had an emergent abdominal operation, defined as one performed for presumed gastrointestinal perforation, infarction, or hemorrhage within 6 hours of admission or surgical consultation. Advanced tests were those that were time-consuming or invasive or required scheduling with other departments so that the risk/benefit ratio of these tests could be questioned. A useful test was one that provided information that contributed to a change in the patient's management. RESULTS: During a 5-year period, 300 consecutive adult patients (158 perforations, 66 hemorrhage, 53 ischemia/infarction, and 23 "other") underwent emergent nontrauma celiotomies. Overall, the death rate was 20%. Advanced preoperative tests were performed in 135 (45%) of the 300 patients, and 40 of these patients had delayed treatments. Preoperative localization of bleeding sites was accomplished in 77% of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding and 86% of patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients in need of emergent abdominal operations should not undergo advanced tests. The primary role of advanced tests in these patients is in the localization of a bleeding site. With the exception of patients who present with hemorrhage, advanced tests frequently cause a delay in treatment.