Search

Background: Thromboprophylaxis after blunt splenic trauma is complicated by the risk of bleeding, but the risk after angioembolization is unknown. We hypothesized that earlier thromboprophylaxis initiation was associated with increased bleeding complications without mitigating venous thromboembolism events., Methods: All blunt trauma patients who underwent splenic angioembolization within 24 hours of arrival were identified from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program datasets from 2017 to 2019. Cases with <24-hour length of stay, other serious injuries, and surgery before angioembolization were excluded. Venous thromboembolism was defined as deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Bleeding complications were defined as splenic surgery, additional embolization, or blood transfusion after thromboprophylaxis initiation. Data were compared with χ 2 analysis and multivariate logistic regression at P < .05., Results: In 1,102 patients, 84% had American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grade III to V splenic injuries, and 73% received thromboprophylaxis. Splenic surgery after angioembolization was more common in those with thromboprophylaxis initiation within the first 24 hours (5.7% vs 1.7%, P = .007), whereas those with the initiation of thromboprophylaxis after 72 hours were more likely to have a pulmonary embolism (2.3% vs 0.2%, P = .001). Overall, venous thromboembolism increased considerably when thromboprophylaxis was initiated after day 3. In multivariate analysis, time to thromboprophylaxis initiation was associated with bleeding (odds ratio 0.74 [95% confidence interval 0.58-0.94]) and venous thromboembolism complications (odds ratio 1.5 [95% confidence interval 1.20-1.81])., Conclusion: This national study evaluates bleeding and thromboembolic risk to elucidate the specific timing of thromboprophylaxis after splenic angioembolization. Initiation of thromboprophylaxis between 24 and 72 hours achieves the safest balance in minimizing bleeding and venous thromboembolism risk, with 48 hours particularly serving as the ideal time for protocolized administration., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Highly sensitive and accurate for the detection of injuries requiring intervention in haemodynamically unstable patients, FAST may underestimate intra-abdominal injuries in stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Diminished accuracy of ultrasound has been reported in different cohorts of multiple injured patients. We hypothesised that multiple injured patients with a high Injury Severity Score (ISS) will have a decreased accuracy of FAST for the assessment of blunt abdominal trauma., Methods: Data from the trauma registry of a Level 1 trauma centre were retrospectively reviewed. All haemodynamically stable blunt trauma patients who underwent both FAST and CT scan of abdomen from January 1, 2000 to January 1, 2005 were included in the cohort. All patients were divided into three groups according to their ISS: Group 1 included patients with an ISS from 1 to 14, Group 2 included patients with an ISS from 16 to 24, and Group 3 consisted of patients with ISS>or=25., Results: 3181 patients with blunt abdominal trauma included into the study were divided into the three groups according to the ISS. The mean ISS was 7.9+/-3.97, 19.6+/-2.48 and 41.3+/-11.95 in Groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The accuracy of ultrasound was 90.6% in the group of patients with the highest ISS (>or=25) compared with 97.5 and 97.1 for Groups 1 and 2 (p<0.001). Similarly, ultrasound had a significantly lower sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for patients in Group 3 compared with the first two groups (p<0.001). There was a significantly lower sensitivity in Group 2 compared with Group 1 (p<0.001), but no differences in specificity, accuracy, PPV or NPV were demonstrated., Conclusion: Patients with high ISS are at increased risk of having ultrasound-occult injuries and have a lower accuracy of their ultrasound examination than patients with low and moderate ISS., ((c) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The current standard for the evaluation of children with blunt abdominal trauma (BAT) consists of physical examination, screening lab values, and computed tomography (CT) scan. We sought to determine if the focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) combined with elevated liver transaminases (AST/ALT) could be used as a screening tool for intra-abdominal injury (IAI) in pediatric patients with BAT., Methods: Registry data at a level 1 trauma center was retrospectively reviewed from 1991-2007. Data collected on BAT patients under the age of 16 y included demographics, injury mechanism, ISS, GCS, imaging studies, serum ALT and AST levels, and disposition. AST and ALT were considered positive if either one was >100 IU/L., Results: Overall, 3171 cases were identified. A total of 1008 (31.8%) patients received CT scan, 1148 (36.2%) had FAST, and 497 (15.7%) patients received both. Of the 497 patients, 400 (87.1%) also had AST and ALT measured. FAST was 50% sensitive, 91% specific, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 68%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 83%, and accuracy of 80%. Combining FAST with elevated AST or ALT resulted in a statistically significant increase in all measures (sensitivity 88%, specificity 98%, PPV 94%, NPV 96%, accuracy 96%)., Conclusions: FAST combined with AST or ALT > 100 IU/L is an effective screening tool for IAI in children following BAT. Pediatric patients with a negative FAST and liver transaminases < 100 IU/L should be observed rather than subjected to the radiation risk of CT.

Background: The role of ultrasound (US) as a screening tool for the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma is still controversial. Determining the types of missed injuries and the accuracy of US in patients with a low GCS will improve the evaluation of these blunt trauma patients., Methods: Prospectively collected data from the trauma registry of a Level I trauma center was reviewed., Results: 7,952 patients were included in the study. US examination had an accuracy of 89%, sensitivity of 77%, specificity of 97%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 78%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 98%. GCS correlated with ISS and base deficit levels. US examination had a significantly lower accuracy in patients with a low GCS and in women., Conclusion: The sensitivity and specificity of US examination is similar in those with normal and low GCS. Therefore ultrasonographic examination may be considered a good screening tool for the evaluation of patients with blunt abdominal trauma, but its accuracy is diminished in patients with a low GCS. Further imaging may be warranted in these patients.

In an effort to better characterize the natural history of pancreatoduodenal injuries, we present a review of clinical experiences in the treatment of combined traumatic pancreatoduodenal injuries, focusing on patients in extremis. Records of patients with abdominal trauma admitted to a level 1 trauma center from 1997 to 2001 were reviewed. Of 240 patients who sustained a pancreatic or duodenal injury, 33 had combined pancreatoduodenal injuries. Eighty-two per cent of the patients (27/33) in this series had penetrating injuries, 72 per cent (24) sustained gunshot wounds (GSW). Thirty-one patients were male, and the mean age was 33 years (range, 7-74). These patients presented with an average Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 22 +/- 12 and an average Glasgow Coma Score of 14 +/- 2. Overall length of stay was 39 +/- 59 days (range, 0-351 days). These 33 patients underwent a total of 57 laparotomies with an average of 1.7 operations per patient (range, 1 to 5 operations). Eighty-four per cent of the patients had an associated gastrointestinal injury and 45 per cent had a major vascular injury. Thirteen of the 33 (39%) patients presented in extremis, all 13 underwent an abbreviated laparotomy. The complication rate was 36 per cent, including fistula, abscess, pancreatitis, and organ dysfunction. There were 6 hospital deaths for a mortality rate of 18 per cent. Pancreatoduodenal injuries are associated with a variety of other serious injuries, which add to the overall complexity of these patients. Abbreviated laparotomy may be helpful when managing combined pancreatoduodenal injuries in patients who are in extremis.

Introduction: Approximately one third of stable patients with significant intra-abdominal injury do not have significant intraperitoneal blood evident on admission. We hypothesized that a delayed, repeat ultrasound study (Secondary Ultrasound--SUS) will reveal additional intra-abdominal injuries and hemoperitoneum., Methods: We performed a prospective observational study of trauma patients at our Level I trauma center from April 2003 to December 2003. Patients underwent an initial ultrasound (US), followed by a SUS examination within 24 hours of admission. Patients not eligible for a SUS because of early discharge, operative intervention or death were excluded. All US and SUS exams were performed and evaluated by surgical/emergency medicine house staff or surgical attendings., Results: Five hundred forty-seven patients had both an initial US and a SUS examination. The sensitivity of the initial US in this patient population was 31.1% and increased to 72.1% on SUS (p < 0.001) for intra-abdominal injury or intra-abdominal fluid. The specificity for the initial US was 99.8% and 99.8% for SUS. The negative predictive value was 92.0% for the initial US and increased to 96.6% for SUS (p = 0.002). The accuracy of the initial ultrasound was 92.1% and increased to 96.7% on the SUS (p < 0.002). No patient with a negative SUS after 4 hours developed clinically significant hemoperitoneum., Conclusion: A secondary ultrasound of the abdomen significantly increases the sensitivity of ultrasound to detect intra-abdominal injury.