Abdominal Trauma Cindy Kin Trauma Conference 8 January 2007 Stanford General Surgery
Blunt Abdominal Trauma Mechanisms • Direct impact • Acceleration-deceleration forces • Shearing forces • No correlation between size of contact area and resultant injuries. • Abdomen = potential site of major blood loss.
Initial Evaluation and Treatment Is there a surgical intraabdominal injury? PE: guarding, peritoneal signs, tenderness, nausea. DRE. Lower rib fxs: 10-20% a/w spleen/liver injury Seatbelt sign a/w intestinal injury and mesenteric tears. Direct blunt trauma: rupture/tear of solid organs. Flank pain or contusion often late signs of retroperitoneal bleed Rapid resuscitation CXR, Pelvic X-ray FAST v DPL v CT Labs: Hct, WBC, amylase, UA, ABG, T+C
Blunt Abdominal Trauma INDICATIONS for CT • Blunt trauma with closed head injury • Blunt trauma with spinal cord injury • Gross hematuria • Pelvic fx, +/- suspected bleeding • Pt requiring serial exams, but will be lost to PE for prolonged period (ie orthopedic procedures, general anesthesia) • Pts with dulled or altered sensorium CONTRAINDICATIONS: unstable patients
Blunt Abdominal Trauma INDICATIONS FOR LAPAROTOMY Shock with expanding abdomen, pnemoperitoneum, retroperitoneal air Peritoneal signs, HD unstable, sepsis Stable w/ peritoneal signs + Observe, +/- re-image equivocal Imaging: CXR FAST/DPL/CT
Blunt Abdominal Trauma ROLE OF DIAGNOSTIC LAPAROSCOPY • Hemodynamically stable patients • Inadequate/equivocal FAST or borderline DPL (80K-120K RBC/HPF) • Intermittent mild hypotension or persistent tachycardia • Persistent abdominal signs/symptoms • Potential to decrease # of nontherapeutic laparotomies
Blunt Abdominal Trauma PREDICTIVE VALUE OF QUANTIFYING BLOOD VOLUME ON FAST EXAM • Hemoperitoneum score on ultrasound a better predictor of need for therapeutic laparotomy than admission blood pressure and/or base deficit. • Hemoperitoneum characterized by measurement and distribution, scored • Ultrasound score >=3 statistically more accurate than combination of SBP and base deficit in determining which patient will undergo a therapeutic abdominal operation • 83% sensitivity, 87% specificity, 85% accuracy • McKenney et al, J Trauma 50:650-656, 2001
Blunt Abdominal Trauma HEPATIC AND SPLENIC INJURIES • Unstable patients: mandatory laparotomy • Stable patients: selective nonoperative approach Hepatic injury -Usually venous bleeding -Grade I-III: 94% success w/ nonop treatment -Grade IV-V: 20% amenable to nonop tx -HD stability, stable Hct, observation -Complications: delayed hemorrhage, bile leak, biloma, intra/peri hepatic abscess. -If stable with ongoing bleeding - angiographic embolization
Blunt Abdominal Trauma SPLENIC INJURIES • Often arterial hemorrhage, therefore nonoperative management less successful. • Predictive factors for nonop success: • Localized trauma to flank/abdomen • Age<60 • No associated trauma precluding obs • Transfusion <4u prbcs • Grade I-III • Grade IV-V: almost invariably require operative intervention • Delayed hemorrhage (hours to weeks post-injury): 8-21%
Blunt Abdominal Trauma RETROPERITONEAL HEMORRHAGE • Source: aorta, IVC, kidneys and ureters, pancreas, pelvic fx, retroperitoneal bowel. • Minimal signs on examination; flank pain and contusion are late findings • FAST/DPL negative; CT can identify
Blunt Abdominal Trauma DUODENAL AND PANCREATIC INJURY • Subtle diagnosis: amylase abnl, obliteration of R psoas or retroperitoneal air on plain abdominal films. • DPL unreliable. • At laparotomy, central upper abdominal retroperitoneal hematoma, bile staining, or air: mandates visualization and examination of panc/duo • Duodenal injury: • 80% lacs (G I-III) - primary repair • 10-15% RYDJ, pyloric exclusion, Whipple • Pancreatic injury • Late complications: time from injury to tx • Abscess, pseudocyst, fistula.
Blunt Abdominal Trauma DIAPHRAGMATIC RUPTURE • 3-5% of all abdominal injuries, L>R • May p/w few signs, need high index of suspicion • Injury mechanism: compartment intrusion, deformity of steering wheel, need for extrication, fall from great height • Prominence/immobility of L hemithorax • NGT in chest, bowel sounds in thorax • CXR: (50% with non-dx initial CXR): • Obliteration of L diaphragm on CXR • Elevation/irregularity of costophrenic angle • Pleural effusion • Confirm with GI contrast studies, dx laparoscopy • Ex-lap and repair
Blunt Abdominal Trauma SMALL BOWEL INJURY • Mechanism: rapid deceleration with compression, shearing • Often at points of fixation: Treitz, ileocecal valve, prior adhesions, mesentery. • Chance fracture (transverse fx of lower thoracic/lumbar vertebral body) raises index of suspicion for SB injury • Dx: DPL may be (-) for 6-8h after intestinal perforation, Clinical signs absent until 6-12h post-injury. • Delayed perforation: due to direct injury, transmural contusion, ischemia from mesenteric vascular injury; usually presents w/in days.
Blunt Abdominal Trauma INJURY TO COLON AND RECTUM • Mechanism: rapid deceleration with steering wheel compression • uncommon • Disruptions of colonic wall or avulsion injury of mesentery • Present with hemoperitoneum, peritonitis.
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Evaluation • Any penetrating wound between nipples and gluteal crease = potential intra-abdominal injury. • Stab wounds: stratify based on location • GSW: higher potential for serious injury.
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma • FAST • Limited, high false negative rate • Useful for pericardial injuries • Diagnostic laparoscopy • Useful for assessing peritoneal penetration, diaphragm injury • Shorter LOS than negative laparotomy Evaluation of Stab Wounds • Local exploration • DPL • 5cc gross blood on aspiration • >20K RBC/mm3 • >500 WBC/mm3 • >175U amylase/100mL • Bacteria • Bile, Food particles • CT • Limited ability to dx hollow organ injury • Useful for posterior SW
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Stab Wounds: Stratification by loci Lower Chest Flank Anterior Abdominal Back Peristernal Potential Mediastinal
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Stab Wounds: Stratification by loci Lower Chest Flank Anterior Abdominal Explore locally, manage expectantly with serial PE Back Peristernal Potential Mediastinal
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Stab Wounds: Stratification by loci Lower Chest Flank explore locally triple contrast CT Anterior Abdominal Explore locally, manage expectantly with serial PE Back Peristernal Potential Mediastinal
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Stab Wounds: Stratification by loci Lower Chest Flank explore locally triple contrast CT Anterior Abdominal Explore locally, manage expectantly with serial PE Back admit for obs Peristernal Potential Mediastinal
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Stab Wounds: Stratification by loci Lower Chest ?Thoracoscopy, Laparoscopy Flank explore locally triple contrast CT Anterior Abdominal Explore locally, manage expectantly with serial PE Back admit for obs Peristernal Potential Mediastinal
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Stab Wounds: Stratification by loci Lower Chest ?Thoracoscopy, Laparoscopy Flank explore locally triple contrast CT Anterior Abdominal Explore locally, manage expectantly with serial PE Back admit for obs Peristernal Potential Mediastinal CVP monitor, U/S Observe >6h, repeat CXR
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Gunshot Wounds • Usually require urgent exploration • Evaluation for peritoneal penetration v tangential GSW. • CT, diagnostic laparoscopy • Use of DPL controversial due to high false negative rate • Ballistics: • Civilian=lower velocity handgun missiles; military = higher velocity rifle missiles • Permanent and temporary cavities: Yaw, Bullet size and type • Shotgun: • Short range: high-velocity and more concentrated • Distant range: multiple low-velocity projectiles, more diffuse, less severe • Antibiotics: cefotetan or cefoxitin in ED
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma ROLE OF DIAGNOSTIC LAPAROSCOPY IN EVALUATING GSW AND NEED FOR LAPAROTOMY • 66 GSW underwent DL, 2/3 of GSW in upper torso • Peritoneal penetration ruled out in 62% • 29% had therapeutic ex-lap, 5% had non-therapeutic ex-lap, 4% had negative ex-lap • Hospital stay: • 4.3 days - negative DL and associated injuries • 8.6 days - laparotomy • 1.1 days - negative DL and no associated injuries. • Fabian et al, Ann Surg 1993; 217:557
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma IMPACT OF DIAGNOSTIC LAPAROSCOPY ON NEGATIVE LAPAROTOMY RATE • Retrospective review 817 pts who underwent ex-lap for abdominal GSW over 4yr: negative ex-lap rate = 12.4% • 22% morbidity, LOS 5.1days • Review of 85 pts with abdominal GSW evaluated with DL • Negative DL in 65%, no missed injuries, no subsequent need for ex-lap; 3% morbidity rate (one pt had urinary retention), LOS 1.4days • Positive DL in 35%, 28 of 30 underwent ex-lap, 86% therapeutic and 14% nontherapeutic (remaining 2 were observed for nonbleeding liver lacs) • Sosa et al. J Trauma 1995;38(2):194
Penetrating Abdominal Trauma IMPACT OF DIAGNOSTIC LAPAROSCOPY ON NEGATIVE LAPAROTOMY RATE • Prospective study of 121 patients with tangential GSW, HD stable • 65% negative DL • Of 25% positive DL, 92.8% (39) underwent ex-lap • 82% (32) therapeutic, 15.4% (6) nontherapeutic, 2.5% (1) negative • No false negative DLs, no delayed laparotomies • Sensitivity for peritoneal penetration 100% • Sosa et al. J Trauma 1995;39(3):501