Abdominal trauma--sensitivity and specificity of postmortem noncontrast imaging findings compared with autopsy findings

The aim of the study was to determine the sensitivity and specificity for typical abdominal injuries after major blunt trauma in postmortem multislice computed tomography (MSCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Negative laparotomy in trauma: are we getting better?

One of the trauma surgeons' daily challenges is the balancing act between negative laparotomy and missed abdominal injury. We opted to characterize the indications that prompted a negative trauma exploratory laparotomy and the rate of missed abdominal injuries in an effort to optimize patient selection for laparotomy. At the Los Angeles County + University of Southern California Medical Center, negative laparotomies and missed injuries are consecutively captured and reviewed at the weekly mortality + morbidity (MM) conferences. All written reports of the MM meetings from January 2003 to December 2008 were reviewed to identify all patients who underwent a negative laparotomy or a laparotomy as a result of an initially missed abdominal injury. Over the 6-year study period, a total of 1871 laparotomies were performed, of which 73 (3.9%) were negative. The rate of missed injuries requiring subsequent laparotomy was 1.3 per cent (25 of 1871). The negative laparotomy rate and the rate of missed injuries did not vary significantly during the study period (2.8 to 4.7%, P = 0.875, and 0.7 to 2.9%, P = 0.689). Penetrating mechanisms accounted for the majority of negative laparotomies (58.9%). The primary indication for negative laparotomy was peritonitis (54.8%) followed by hypotension (28.8%) and suspicious computed tomographic scan findings (27.4%). The complication rate after negative laparotomy was 14.5 per cent, and of these, 10.1 per cent were directly related to the procedure. A low but steady rate of negative laparotomies and missed abdominal injuries after trauma remains. Negative laparotomies and missed abdominal injuries when they occur are still associated with significant complication rates and a prolonged length of stay.

The accuracy of FAST in relation to grade of solid organ injuries: a retrospective analysis of 226 trauma patients with liver or splenic lesion

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the role of a negative FAST in the diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm of multiply injured patients with liver or splenic lesions. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 226 multiply injured patients with liver or splenic lesions treated at Bern University Hospital, Switzerland. RESULTS: FAST failed to detect free fluid or organ lesions in 45 of 226 patients with spleen or liver injuries (sensitivity 80.1%). Overall specificity was 99.5%. The positive and negative predictive values were 99.4% and 83.3%. The overall likelihood ratios for a positive and negative FAST were 160.2 and 0.2. Grade III-V organ lesions were detected more frequently than grade I and II lesions. Without the additional diagnostic accuracy of a CT scan, the mean ISS of the FAST-false-negative patients would be significantly underestimated and 7 previously unsuspected intra-abdominal injuries would have been missed. CONCLUSION: FAST is an expedient tool for the primary assessment of polytraumatized patients to rule out high grade intra-abdominal injuries. However, the low overall diagnostic sensitivity of FAST may lead to underestimated injury patterns and delayed complications may occur. Hence, in hemodynamically stable patients with abdominal trauma, an early CT scan should be considered and one must be aware of the potential shortcomings of a "negative FAST".

Decision making in patients with acute abdominal pain at a university and at a rural hospital: Does the value of abdominal sonography differ?

Introduction and objectives Abdominal sonography is regarded as a quick and effective diagnostic tool for acute abdominal pain in emergency medicine. However, final diagnosis is usually based on a combination of various clinical examinations and radiography. The role of sonography in the decision making process at a hospital with advanced imaging capabilities versus a hospital with limited imaging capabilities but more experienced clinicians is unclear. The aim of this pilot study was to assess the relative importance of sonography and its influence on the clinical management of acute abdominal pain, at two Swiss hospitals, a university hospital (UH) and a rural hospital (RH). Methods 161 patients were prospectively examined clinically. Blood tests and sonography were performed in all patients. Patients younger than 18 years and patients with trauma were excluded. In both hospitals, the diagnosis before and after ultrasonography was registered in a protocol. Certainty of the diagnosis was expressed on a scale from 0% to 100%. The decision processes used to manage patients before and after they underwent sonography were compared. The diagnosis at discharge was compared to the diagnosis 2 – 6 weeks thereafter. Results Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of sonography were high: 94%, 88% and 91%, respectively. At the UH, management after sonography changed in only 14% of cases, compared to 27% at the RH. Additional tests were more frequently added at the UH (30%) than at the RH (18%), but had no influence on the decision making process-whether to operate or not. At the UH, the diagnosis was missed in one (1%) patient, but in three (5%) patients at the RH. No significant difference was found between the two hospitals in frequency of management changes due to sonography or in the correctness of the diagnosis. Conclusion Knowing that sonography has high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy in the diagnosis of acute abdominal pain, one would assume it would be an important diagnostic tool, particularly at the RH, where tests/imaging studies are rare. However, our pilot study indicates that sonography provides important diagnostic information in only a minority of patients with acute abdominal pain. Sonography was more important at the rural hospital than at the university hospital. Further costly examinations are generally ordered for verification, but these additional tests change the final treatment plan in very few patients.

Intra-abdominal pressure development after different temporary abdominal closure techniques in a porcine model

BACKGROUND: Decompressive laparotomy followed by temporary abdominal closure (TAC) is an established prophylaxis and treatment for abdominal compartment syndrome. The herein presented study aimed at the comparison of volume reserve capacity and development of intra-abdominal hypertension after forced primary abdominal closure and different TAC techniques in a porcine model. METHODS: Eight anesthesized and mechanically ventilated domestic pigs underwent a standardized midline laparotomy. A bag was placed into the abdominal cavity. Before abdominal closure, the bag was prefilled with 3,000 mL water to simulate increased intra-abdominal volume. The intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) was then increased in 2 mm Hg steps up to 30 mm Hg by adding volume (volume reserve capacity) to the intra-abdominal bag. Volume reserve capacity with the corresponding IAP were analyzed and compared for primary abdominal closure, bag silo closure, a zipper system, and vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) with different negative pressures (-50, -100, and -150 mm Hg). Hemodynamic and pulmonary parameters were monitored throughout the experiment. RESULTS: Volume reserve capacity was the highest for bag silo closure followed by the zipper system and VAC with primary abdominal closure providing the least volume reserve capacity in the whole IAP range. Of interest, VAC -50 mm Hg resulted in a lower volume reserve capacity when compared with VAC -100 and -150 mm Hg. Pulmonary and hemodynamic parameters demonstrated no significant differences between primary abdominal closure and the evaluated TAC techniques at all IAP levels. CONCLUSIONS: The present experimental in vivo study indicates that bag silo closure and zipper systems may be favorable TAC techniques after decompressive laparotomy. In contrast, the VAC techniques resulted in lower volume reserve capacity and therefore may bear an increased risk for recurrent intra-abdominal hypertension in the initial phase after decompressive laparotomy.

Personal experience with whole-body, low-dosage, digital X-ray scanning (LODOX-Statscan) in trauma

BACKGROUND: Lodox-Statscan is a whole-body, skeletal and soft-tissue, low-dose X-ray scanner Anterior-posterior and lateral thoraco-abdominal studies are obtained in 3-5 minutes with only about one-third of the radiation required for conventional radiography. Since its approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the USA, several trauma centers have incorporated this technology into their Advanced Trauma Life Support protocols. This review provides a brief overview of the system, and describes the authors' own experience with the system. METHODS: We performed a PubMed search to retrieve all references with 'Lodox' and 'Stat-scan' used as search terms. We furthermore used the google search engine to identify existing alternatives. To the best of our knowledge, this is the only FDA-approved device of its kind currently used in trauma. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The intention of our review has been to sensitize the readership that such alternative devices exist. The key message is that low dosage full body radiography may be an alternative to conventional resuscitation room radiography which is usually a prelude to CT scanning (ATLS algorithm). The combination of both is radiation intensive and therefore we consider any reduction of radiation a success. But only the future will show whether LS will survive in the face of low-dose radiation CT scanners and magnetic resonance imaging devices that may eventually completely replace conventional radiography.

Free abdominal fluid without obvious solid organ injury upon CT imaging: an actual problem or simply over-diagnosing?

Whereas a non-operative approach for hemodynamically stable patients with free intraabdominal fluid in the presence of solid organ injury is generally accepted, the presence of free fluid in the abdomen without evidence of solid organ injury not only presents a challenge for the treating emergency physician but also for the surgeon in charge. Despite recent advances in imaging modalities, with multi-detector computed tomography (CT) (with or without contrast agent) usually the imaging method of choice, diagnosis and interpretation of the results remains difficult. While some studies conclude that CT is highly accurate and relatively specific at diagnosing mesenteric and hollow viscus injury, others studies deem CT to be unreliable. These differences may in part be due to the experience and the interpretation of the radiologist and/or the treating physician or surgeon.A search of the literature has made it apparent that there is no straightforward answer to the question what to do with patients with free intraabdominal fluid on CT scanning but without signs of solid organ injury. In hemodynamically unstable patients, free intraabdominal fluid in the absence of solid organ injury usually mandates immediate surgical intervention. For patients with blunt abdominal trauma and more than just a trace of free intraabdominal fluid or for patients with signs of peritonitis, the threshold for a surgical exploration - preferably by a laparoscopic approach - should be low. Based on the available information, we aim to provide the reader with an overview of the current literature with specific emphasis on diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to this problem and suggest a possible algorithm, which might help with the adequate treatment of such patients.

Concomitant injuries are an important determinant of outcome of high-grade blunt hepatic trauma

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the clinical importance of concomitant injuries in polytraumatized patients with high-grade blunt liver injury. A retrospective single-centre study was performed to investigate the safety of non-operative management of liver injury and the impact of concomitant intra- and extra-abdominal injuries on clinical outcome. METHODS: Some 183 patients with blunt liver injury were admitted to Berne University Hospital, Switzerland, between January 2000 and December 2006. Grade 3-5 injuries were considered to be high grade. RESULTS: Immediate laparotomy was required by 35 patients (19.1 per cent), owing to extrahepatic intra-abdominal injury (splenic and vascular injuries, perforations) in 21 cases. The mortality rate was 16.9 per cent; 22 of the 31 deaths were due to concomitant lesions. Of 81 patients with high-grade liver injury, 63 (78 per cent) were managed without surgery; liver-related and extra-abdominal complication rates in these patients were 11 and 17 per cent respectively. Grades 4 and 5 liver injury were associated with hepatic-related and extra-abdominal complications. CONCLUSION: Concomitant injuries are a major determinant of outcome in patients with blunt hepatic injury and should be given high priority by trauma surgeons. An algorithm for the management of blunt liver injury is proposed.