Nonoperative management of blunt renal trauma: a prospective study

Despite the abundance of literature on nonoperative management (NOM) of blunt trauma to the liver and spleen there is limited information on NOM of blunt renal injuries. In an effort to evaluate the role of NOM 37 consecutive unselected patients with renal injuries (grade 1, four; grade 2, 12; grade 3, 11; grade 4, six; and grade 5, four) were followed prospectively over 30 months (Match 1999 to September 2001). Patients without peritonitis or hemodynamic instability were managed nonoperatively regardless of the appearance of the kidney on CT scan. Six (16%) patients were operated on immediately but only two (5.4%) for the kidney (grades 3 and 5 respectively). Of the remaining 31 patients 26 (84%) were managed successfully without an operation (grade 1 or 2, 12; grades 3-5, 14). Five patients were taken to the operating room after a period of observation (3, 3.5, 9, 36, and 44 hours respectively) but only three for the kidney (grades 4 and 5). The overall failure rate was 16 per cent (5 of 31); the rate of failure specifically related to the renal injury was 9.6 per cent (three of 31). Compared with the patients with successful NOM the five patients with failed NOM were more severely injured (Injury Severity Score > or = 15 in 80% vs 27%, P = 0.04), required in the first 6 hours more fluids (4.17 +/- 1.72 vs 1.87 +/- 1.4 liters, P = 0.003) and blood transfusions (2.40 +/- 2 vs 0.42 +/- 1.17 units, P = 0.005), and more frequently had a positive trauma ultrasound (80% vs 11.5%, P = 0.005). We conclude that NOM is the prevailing method of treatment after blunt renal trauma. It is successful in the majority of patients without peritonitis or hemodynamic instability and should be considered regardless of the severity of renal injury. Predictors of failure may exist on the basis of injury severity, fluid and blood requirements, and abdominal ultrasonographic findings and need validation by a larger sample size.     

Nonoperative management of blunt splenic and hepatic trauma in the pediatric population: significant differences between adult and pediatric surgeons?

Although operative management was the preferred method of treating blunt abdominal trauma in the past, recent literature and practice recommend a nonsurgical approach to most pediatric splenic and hepatic injuries. The majority of data supporting the safety and efficacy of this nonoperative approach are derived from university trauma programs with a pediatric center where care was managed by pediatric surgeons only. To evaluate the applicability of this approach in a regional trauma center where pediatric patients are managed by pediatric and non-pediatric surgeons we reviewed the experience at a Level II community trauma center. Fifty-four children (16 years of age or less) were admitted between April 1992 and April 1998 after sustaining blunt traumatic splenic and/or hepatic injuries. There were 37 (69%) males and 17 (31%) females; the average age was 11 years (range 4 months to 16 years). Of the 54 patients 34 (63%) sustained splenic injuries, 17 (31%) sustained hepatic injuries, and three (6%) sustained both splenic and hepatic injuries. All of these injuries were diagnosed by CT scan or during laparotomy. The average Injury Severity Score was 14.9 with a range from four to 57. Of the 47 patients initially admitted for nonoperative management one patient failed nonoperative management and required operative intervention. In our study 98 per cent (46 of 47 patients) of pediatric patients were successfully managed nonoperatively. Complications of nonoperative management occurred in two patients. Both developed splenic pseudocysts after splenic injury, which required later operative repair. These data are comparable with those from university trauma programs and confirm that nonoperative management is safe in a community trauma center. The majority of children with blunt splenic and hepatic trauma can be successfully treated without surgery, in a regional trauma center treated by nonpediatric trauma surgeons, if the decision is based on careful initial evaluation, aggressive resuscitation, and close observation of their hemodynamic stability.     

Injuries associated with pediatric liver trauma

Injury remains the leading cause of childhood mortality for children younger than 14 years of age, with the liver being particularly susceptible to blunt trauma in children. This study reviews the authors' institutions' experience with pediatric liver injuries in an attempt to establish current patterns of injury, management and outcomes. A single-center, retrospective review was conducted of 105 consecutive pediatric patients who presented with a traumatic liver injury from January 1996 through February 2004. Average patient age was 13.1+/-4.9 years and 58 per cent were male. Perihospital mortality was 8.6 per cent, with 67 per cent of mortality being attributed to head injury. The majority of patients were managed nonoperatively (81%). Liver injury was most often grade II (35%) by CT scan. Liver injury grade did not affect survival, but did affect injury management, with grade I and grade IV liver injuries more likely to be managed surgically (P < 0.001). Grade I liver injuries were associated with concomitant spleen injuries, whereas grade IV injuries were associated with pancreatic injuries. Surgical management was associated with a higher injury severity score (P = 0.005), higher mortality (P = 0.01), and with other associated injuries as well. Children experiencing blunt abdominal trauma are at risk of significant morbidity and mortality; however, these risks stem more likely from associated injuries than injury to the liver proper. Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for potentially catastrophic associated injuries to the pancreas with high-grade liver injury.     

Liver lacerations--a marker of severe but sometimes subtle intra-abdominal injuries in adults

Experience with conservative management of solid viscus injuries from abdominal trauma in children has produced the impetus for a similar management in adults. To explore the implications of such a policy, we reviewed the records of 82 patients with hepatic injuries noted at laparotomy. Indications for laparotomy were positive findings on diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL) or CT scan, or a history of penetrating trauma. The liver injuries were graded according to severity: grade I, 19 patients; grade II, 20 patients (low severity = LS); grade III, 14 patients; grade IV, 6 patients (high severity = HS). Twenty-three injuries were not classified by the operating surgeon. Of the 53 patients with blunt hepatic trauma, 23 (43%) had concomitant injuries that required operative intervention. Twenty-nine patients had penetrating liver injuries. Fourteen (48%) had associated injuries requiring intervention. Patients most likely to have nonoperative management, those with grade I and grade II liver injuries (LS), comprised 48 of the total. In this subgroup there were 26 (54.2%) associated injuries requiring operative intervention. Shock could not be used as a factor to differentiate patients not requiring operative intervention. Nineteen of the LS patients requiring operative intervention secondary to associated injury were never in shock. In adult trauma victims positive DPL findings secondary to minor hepatic injuries that might not require operative intervention serve as a marker for associated injuries that do require operation. The risk of nonoperative management of hepatic injuries based upon radiologic diagnosis is not the result of complications from the hepatic injury.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Pediatric blunt liver injury: establishment of criteria for appropriate management

There is no consensus regarding the most appropriate management of pediatric blunt liver injury. This study addresses this issue by reviewing our experience with blunt liver trauma in relationship to the grade of injury. Forty-one pediatric patients with blunt abdominal trauma and documented liver injury were managed from 1979 to 1989. Fifteen (37%) underwent celiotomy. Three children had extensive parenchymal injuries (grade IV or V) requiring resection and three others died intraoperatively, secondary to exsanguinating hemorrhage of associated injuries (grade V) to the hepatic veins and inferior vena cava. The need for celiotomy was obvious in these patients. In 9 of the 15 children who underwent exploration (60%), bleeding from the liver injury (grade II or III) had ceased by the time of celiotomy. These children did not appear to benefit from the operation. Twenty-six of the 41 patients (63%) were selected for nonoperative management because they were hemodynamically stable after initial resuscitation and did not show signs of associated intraabdominal injuries requiring surgical intervention. These children underwent evaluation by abdominal computed axial tomography scan (grade I, II, III, and IV injuries). Blood transfusions were given to keep the hematocrit above 30%. Seventeen of the 26 children managed nonoperatively (65%) did not require blood replacement. The mean (+/- SEM) transfusion volume for the remaining nine children was 14.8 +/- 2.5 mL/kg. Blunt liver injury represents a spectrum from a minimal parenchymal hematoma to massive liver disruption. We conclude that celiotomy is necessary for hepatic injury hemodynamically stable injured children with transfusion requirements less than 40 mL/kg can be managed nonoperatively in an appropriate setting.     

Nonoperative management of blunt hepatic trauma is the treatment of choice for hemodynamically stable patients. Results of a prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: A number of retrospective studies recently have been published concerning nonoperative management of minor liver injuries, with cumulative success rates greater than 95%. However, no prospective analysis that involves a large number of higher grade injuries has been reported. The current study was conducted to evaluate the safety of nonoperative management of blunt hepatic trauma in hemodynamically stable patients regardless of injury severity. METHODS: Over a 22-month period, patients with blunt hepatic injury were evaluated prospectively. Unstable patients underwent laparotomies, and stable patients had abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans. Those with nonhepatic operative indications underwent exploration, and the remainder were managed nonoperatively in the trauma intensive care unit. This group was compared with a hemodynamically matched operated cohort of blunt hepatic trauma patients (control subjects) who had been prospectively analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six patients had blunt hepatic trauma. Twenty-four (18%) underwent emergent exploration. Of the remaining 112 patients, 12 (11%) failed observation and underwent celiotomy--5 were liver-related failures (5%) and 7 were nonliver related (6%). Liver related failure rates for CT grades I through V were 20%, 3%, 3%, 0%, and 12%, respectively, and rates according to hemoperitoneum were 2% for minimal, 6% for moderate, and 7% for large. The remaining 100 patients were successfully treated without operation--30% had minor injuries (grades I-II) and 70% had major (grades III-V) injuries. There were no differences in admission characteristics between nonoperative success or failures, except admission systolic blood pressure (127 vs. 104; p < 0.04). Comparing the nonoperative group to the control group, there were no differences in admission hemodynamics or hospital length of stay, but nonoperative patients had significantly fewer blood transfusions (1.9 vs. 4.0 units; p < 0.02) and fewer abdominal complications (3% vs. 11%; p < 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperative management is safe for hemodynamically stable patients with blunt hepatic injury, regardless of injury severity. There are fewer abdominal complications and less transfusions when compared with a matched cohort of operated patients. Based on admission characteristics or CT scan, it is not possible to predict failures; therefore, intensive care unit monitoring is necessary.     

Twenty Years of Splenic Preservation in Trauma: Lower Early Infection Rate Than in Splenectomy

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies concerning the operative preservation and nonoperative management of splenic injuries in patients with splenic trauma have been published; however, few studies have analyzed prospectively the results and early complication rates of a defined management in splenic injury. METHODS: From 1986 to 2006, adult patients with blunt splenic injuries were evaluated prospectively with the intent of splenic preservation. Hemodynamically unstable patients underwent laparotomy. Stable patients were treated conservatively regardless of the grade of splenic injury determined by ultrasound and/or CT scan. RESULTS: During a 20-year period, 155 patients were prospectively evaluated. In 98 patients (63%), the spleen could be preserved by nonoperative (64 patients, 65%) or operative (34 patients, 35%) treatment and 57 patients (37%) needed splenectomy. There were no differences in age, sex, or trauma score between the groups, but a higher early infection rate in patients with splenectomy compared with patients with splenic preservation (p < 0.005) was observed, even if the patients were matched with respect to multiple trauma using the Injury Severity Score (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Splenic preservation in patients with blunt splenic injury by operative or nonoperative treatment leads to lower early infection rates in adults and, therefore, should be advocated.     

Complications of nonoperative management of high-grade blunt hepatic injuries

BACKGROUND: Nonoperative management of blunt hepatic injuries is highly successful. Complications associated with high-grade injuries, however, have not been well characterized. The purpose of the present study was therefore to define hepatic-related complications and associated treatment modalities in patients undergoing nonoperative management of high-grade blunt hepatic injuries. METHODS: Three hundred thirty-seven patients from two regional Level I trauma centers with grade 3 to 5 blunt hepatic injuries during a 40-month period were reviewed. Complications and treatment of hepatic-related complications in patients not requiring laparotomy in the first 24 hours were identified. RESULTS: Of 337 patients with a grade 3 to 5 injury, 230 (68%) were managed nonoperatively. There were 37 hepatic-related complications in 25 patients (11%); 63% (5 of 8) of patients with grade 5 injuries developed complications, 21% (19 of 92) of patients with grade 4 injuries, but only 1% (1 of 130) of patients with grade 3 injuries. Complications included bleeding in 13 patients managed by angioembolization (n = 12) and laparotomy (n = 1), liver abscesses in 2 patients managed with computed tomography-guided drainage (n = 2) and subsequent laparotomy (n = 1). In one patient with bleeding, hepatic necrosis followed surgical ligation of the right hepatic artery and required delayed hepatic lobectomy. Sixteen biliary complications were managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and stenting (n = 7), drainage (n = 5), and laparoscopy (n = 4). Three patients had suspected abdominal sepsis and underwent a negative laparotomy, whereas an additional three patients underwent laparotomy for abdominal compartment syndrome. CONCLUSION: Nonoperative management of high-grade liver injuries can be safely accomplished. Mortality is low; however, complications in grade 4 and 5 injuries should be anticipated and may require a combination of operative and nonoperative management strategies.     

Operative intervention for pediatric liver injuries: avoiding delay in treatment.

To identify the physiological and anatomic factors that characterize the need for operative management of blunt pediatric liver injuries, the case records of 106 pediatric trauma victims with liver injuries over a 6-year period were reviewed. Sixty-nine patients were managed without operation (nonoperative) and 37 underwent operation, 7 with penetrating and 30 with blunt liver injuries. Of these 30 patients, 21 underwent laparotomy due to blunt liver injuries (operative); the remaining 9 patients required operation due to associated intraabdominal injuries. Nine (45%) of the 21 operative patients had major hepatic vein or retrohepatic vena caval injuries, 7 of whom died. Overall mortality was 9.4% (10/106). When nonoperative and operative groups were compared, those who underwent laparotomy due to blunt liver injuries: (1) had significantly lower Champion and Pediatric Trauma Scores due to multisystem injury; (2) had 25% or greater lobar disruption with pelvic blood collections on computed tomography scan; (3) underwent early transfusion within 2 hours of admission (18/21); and (4) were frequently found to have a major hepatic vein or retrohepatic vena caval injury at the time of operation. Only one patient successfully managed without operation received greater than 30 mL/kg of blood products within 24 hours of admission. As selective nonoperative management of pediatric liver injuries gains widespread acceptance, the identification of factors that predict the need for operative intervention will limit the potential risks of delay in treatment.     

Blunt renal trauma in children: experience with conservative management at a pediatric trauma center

BACKGROUND: The authors reviewed the outcome for children with blunt renal injury managed with a nonoperative protocol at their pediatric trauma center. METHODS: Fifty-five consecutive children aged 0.5 to 17 years with blunt renal injury managed over a 14-year period were reviewed. All patients were evaluated with computed tomographic scanning. Injuries were graded according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Organ Injury Scale. RESULTS: Forty-eight of 55 children (87%) were successfully managed nonoperatively. Overall, there were 5 grade I, 13 grade II, 18 grade III, 14 grade IV, and 5 grade V injuries. All children with grades I and III injuries were successfully managed nonoperatively. Two (6%) of these children required transfusion. Only four (29%) children with grade IV and three (60%) with grade V injuries required surgical interventions (one nephrostomy, six nephrectomies). Excluding patients with continuing hemorrhage, only 2 (14%) of 14 with high-grade injuries required surgical intervention (1 nephrostomy, 1 nephrectomy). Clearance of gross hematuria correlated with severity of injury and was prolonged in grade IV and V compared with grade I to III injuries (6.8 +/- 2.7 vs. 3.2 +/- 2.1 days, respectively; p < 0.05). Fifty-one children (93%) available for follow-up were normotensive with normal renal function. CONCLUSION: These data support the use of conservative management for all grades in stable children with blunt renal injury. Transfusion requirements, operative rates, and outcome are consistent with other pediatric solid organ injuries.     

Significance of minimal or no intraperitoneal fluid visible on CT scan associated with blunt liver and splenic injuries: a multicenter analysis

BACKGROUND: The use of ultrasound (U/S) for the evaluation of patients with blunt abdominal trauma is gaining increasing acceptance. Patients who would have undergone computed tomographic (CT) scan may now be evaluated solely with U/S. Solid organ injuries with minimal or no free fluid may be missed by surgeon sonographers. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the incidence and clinical importance of liver and splenic injuries with minimal or no free intraperitoneal fluid visible on CT scan. We hypothesized that these solid organ injuries occur infrequently and are of minor clinical significance. METHODS: Patient records and CT scans were reviewed for the presence of and outcome associated with blunt liver and splenic injuries with minimal (<250 mL) or no free fluid detected by an attending radiologist. Data were collected from six major trauma centers during a 4-year period before the introduction of U/S and included demographics, grade of injury (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma scale), need for operative intervention, and outcome. RESULTS: A total of 938 patients with liver and splenic injuries were identified. In this group, 11% of liver injuries and 12% of splenic injuries had no free fluid visible on CT scan and could be missed by diagnostic peritoneal lavage or U/S. Of the 938 patients, 267 (28%) met the inclusion criteria; 161 had injury to the spleen and 125 had injury to the liver. In the 267 patients studied, 97% of the injuries were managed nonoperatively. However, 8 patients (3%) required operative intervention for bleeding. Compared with the liver, the spleen was significantly more likely to bleed (p = 0.01), but the grade of splenic injury was not related to the risk for hemorrhage (p = 0.051). CONCLUSION: Data from this study suggest that injuries to the liver or spleen with minimal or no intraperitoneal fluid visible on CT scan occur more frequently than predicted but usually are of minimal clinical significance. However, patients with splenic injuries may be missed by abdominal U/S. We found a 5% associated risk of bleeding. Therefore, abdominal U/S should not be used as the sole diagnostic modality in all stable patients at risk for blunt abdominal injury.     

Nonoperative management of solid abdominal organ injuries from blunt trauma: impact of neurologic impairment

The role of nonoperative management of solid abdominal organ injury from blunt trauma in neurologically impaired patients has been questioned. A statewide trauma registry was reviewed from January 1993 through December 1995 for all adult (age >12 years) patients with blunt trauma and an abdominal solid organ injury (kidney, liver, or spleen) of Abbreviated Injury Scale score > or =2. Patients with initial hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg) were excluded. Patients were stratified by Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) into normal (GCS 15), mild to moderate (GCS 8-14), and severe (GCS < or =7) impairment groups. Management was either operative or nonoperative; failure of nonoperative management was defined as requiring laparotomy for intraabdominal injury more than 24 hours after admission. In the 3-year period 2327 patients sustained solid viscus injuries; 1561 of these patients were managed nonoperatively (66 per cent). The nonoperative approach was initiated less frequently in those patients with greater impairment in mental status: GCS 15, 71 per cent; GCS 8 to 14, 62 per cent; and GCS < or =7, 50 per cent. Mortality, hospital length of stay, and intensive care unit days were greater in operatively managed GCS 15 and 8 to 14 groups but were not different on the basis of management in the GCS < or =7 group. Failure of nonoperative management occurred in 94 patients (6%). There was no difference in the nonoperative failure rate between patients with normal mental status and those with mild to moderate or severe head injuries. Nonoperative management of neurologically impaired hemodynamically stable patients with blunt injuries of liver, spleen, or kidney is commonly practiced and is successful in more than 90 per cent of cases. No differences were noted in the rates of delayed laparotomy or survival between normal, mild to moderately head-injured, and severely head-injured patients.     

Contrast extravasation predicts the need for operative intervention in children with blunt splenic trauma

BACKGROUND: Although the presence of a contrast blush (CB) on computed tomographic (CT) scan is associated with an increased failure rate of nonoperative management in adults with blunt splenic injury, little information is available for the pediatric population, where nonoperative management is the standard of care. Our aim was to determine whether the finding of CB on CT scan could predict failure of nonoperative therapy in children with blunt splenic injury. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 343 patients admitted with blunt splenic injury to our Level I pediatric trauma center over a 7-year period was performed. All CT scans were reviewed by a radiologist who was blinded to the patient outcome. We excluded 127 patients who either underwent immediate laparotomy without a CT scan or whose CT scans were unavailable at the time of this review. We divided the patients into two groups on the basis of the presence or absence of CB on the updated reading of the CT scan. Demographic variables analyzed included age, sex, mechanism of injury, Injury Severity Score, Glasgow Coma Scale score, initial hemoglobin and hematocrit, and emergency department pulse rate and systolic blood pressure. Outcome measures compared include length of stay, length of intensive care unit stay, the need for splenic intervention, and mortality. Continuous variables were compared using Student's t test for normally distributed data and the Mann-Whitney test for skewed data. Categorical data were compared using chi2 analysis or Fisher's exact test. Statistical significance was assigned to values of p < 0.05. RESULTS: Among the study population (N = 216), 27 patients (12.5%) had CB on CT scan. Patients with CB had significantly lower hematocrit (p = 0.0004) and required operative intervention more frequently than those without CB (22% vs. 4%;p = 0.0008). Among patients with CB, mean pulse rate at presentation was higher in those that required splenic intervention (SI) (129 +/- 20.1) compared with those who underwent successful nonoperative therapy (100.4 +/- 23.1; p = 0.01). Only grade V injuries correlated with the need for laparotomy. CONCLUSION: Children with blunt splenic injury who have CB on CT scan are more likely to require SI than those without CB. However, because the majority of patients with CB did not require SI, in the absence of hemodynamic instability, this finding may be insufficient to determine the need for SI. CB is a specific marker of active bleeding that may predict the need for early splenic intervention in a specific subset of patients at presentation.     

Blunt hepatic injury: a paradigm shift from operative to nonoperative management in the 1990s

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the outcome of hemodynamically stable patients with blunt hepatic injury managed nonoperatively, and to examine the impact of this approach on the outcome of all patients with blunt hepatic injury. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Until recently, operative management has been the standard for liver injury. A prospective trial from the authors' institution had shown that nonoperative management could safely be applied to hemodynamically stable patients with blunt hepatic injury. The present study reviewed the authors' institutional experience with blunt hepatic trauma since that trial and compared the results with prior institutional experience. METHODS: Six hundred sixty-one patients with blunt hepatic trauma during the 5-year period ending December 1998 were reviewed (NONOP2). The outcomes were compared with two previous studies from this institution: operative 1985 to 1990 (OP) and nonoperative 1993 to 1994 (NONOP1). RESULTS: All 168 OP patients were managed operatively. Twenty-four (18%) of 136 NONOP1 patients and 101 (15%) of the 661 NONOP2 patients required immediate exploration for hemodynamic instability. Forty-two (7%) patients failed nonoperative management; 20 were liver-related. Liver-related failures of nonoperative management were associated with higher-grade injuries and with larger amounts of hemoperitoneum on computed tomography scanning. Twenty-four-hour transfusions, abdominal infections, and hospital length of stay were all significantly lower in the NONOP1 and NONOP2 groups versus the OP cohort. The liver-related death rate was constant at 4% in the three cohorts over the three time periods. CONCLUSIONS: Although urgent surgery continues to be the standard for hemodynamically compromised patients with blunt hepatic trauma, there has been a paradigm shift in the management of hemodynamically stable patients. Approximately 85% of all patients with blunt hepatic trauma are stable. In this group, nonoperative management significantly improves outcomes over operative management in terms of decreased abdominal infections, decreased transfusions, and decreased lengths of hospital stay.     

Blunt aortic injury with concomitant intra-abdominal solid organ injury: treatment priorities revisited

BACKGROUND: Patients with blunt aortic injury (BAI) often have concomitant liver or spleen (L/S) injuries. With increasing use of cardiopulmonary bypass with heparinization in repair of BAI, many advocate operative management of the L/S injury before aortic repair to eliminate risk of hemorrhage. We evaluated the safety of nonoperative management (NOM) of blunt L/S injuries in patients undergoing acute BAI repair with bypass. METHODS: All patients admitted over a 6-year period with BAI were identified from the registry of our Level I trauma center. Patients with isolated L/S injuries without BAI admitted over the same period served as controls. Groups were compared with regard to demographics, injury characteristics, hospital course, and mortality. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were diagnosed with BAI from 1994 to 2000; 28 (33%) also had blunt abdominal trauma. Three patients with severe brain injury did not undergo BAI repair, and five required laparotomy before BAI repair for other intra-abdominal injuries (two for hemodynamic instability with splenic injury, and three for concomitant bowel injury). Therefore, 20 of 28 (71.4%) BAI patients with grade I or II L/S injury (Aorta L/S group) underwent planned NOM. All BAIs were repaired using partial bypass with full heparinization. These 20 patients are compared with 894 patients with grade I or II L/S injuries with no BAI (L/S group) over the same time period. There was no difference in the nonoperative failure rate of the Aorta L/S group versus the L/S group (0% vs. 1.7%). Both groups had similar complication rates. The Aorta L/S group was also compared with 56 BAIs without solid organ injury (Aorta group). Although the Aorta L/S group was more severely injured than the Aorta group (Injury Severity Score of 35.3 vs. 26.8, < 0.0001), transfusion rates (5.7 U of packed red blood cells vs. 8.0 U of packed red blood cells, p = NS), hospital days (17.9 vs. 19.1, p = NS) and mortality (10% vs. 9%, p = NS) were similar. CONCLUSION: NOM of patients with grade I or II L/S injury who undergo systemic anticoagulation with heparin for repair of BAI is safe and associated with transfusion rates similar to BAI alone. Patients with low-grade liver or spleen injuries do not require laparotomy before BAI repair using partial bypass.     

Factors of Failure for Nonoperative Management of Blunt Liver and Splenic Injuries

A review of the literature describing the management of hepatic and splenic injuries indicates that as many as 67% of exploratory celiotomies for blunt trauma are reported as nontherapeutic. Avoiding unnecessary surgery through nonoperative management offers an attractive alternative. Nonetheless, nonoperative management should not be considered unless the patient meets the following criteria: (1) hemodynamic stability, with or without minimal fluid resuscitation; (2) no demonstrable peritoneal signs on abdominal examination; and (3) the absence on computed tomography (CT) scan of any intraperitoneal or retroperitoneal injuries that require operative intervention. Although a patient may meet these criteria, several additional factors can serve as predictors of failure of nonoperative management. Such predictors among patients with hepatic injuries are hemodynamic instability, liver injury of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grades IV and V (especially when accompanied by hemodynamic instability), and pooling of contrast on CT scan. Formerly thought to be a predictor of failure of nonoperative management, periportal tracking has not been cited as such in recent reports of hepatic injuries. Among patients with blunt splenic injuries, such predictors include hemodynamic instability, injury of grade IV or higher, large associated hemoperitoneum, and contrast blush on CT scan. Although preexisting splenic disease and age older than 55 years have traditionally been considered predictors of failure, recent reports have shown that these characteristics do not appear to be associated with an increased need for surgical intervention.     

Is the Grading of Liver Injuries a Useful Clinical Tool in the Initial Management of Blunt Trauma Patients?

Abstract Background:   Computed tomography (CT) has become the preferred method for evaluation of the abdomen for victims of blunt trauma. Grading of liver injuries, primarily by CT, has been advocated as a measure of severity and, by implication, the likelihood for intervention or complications. We have sought to determine if grading of liver injuries, as a clinical tool, affects immediate or extended management of patients. Methods:   We have retrospectively reviewed all patients sustaining blunt liver injuries as diagnosed by CT over a five-year period at a Level I trauma center to determine if grading of injury influenced management. The AAST organ scaling system was utilized (major grade 4–5, minor grade 1–3), as well as the ISS, AIS, mortality, morbidity, and treatment. There were 133 patients available for review. The patients were grouped into major (n = 20) and minor (n = 113) liver injuries and operative (n = 12) and nonoperative (n = 121) management. Results:   Major liver injuries had a higher ISS (39 + 13 vs. 27 + 15, p = 0.001) and were more likely to require operative intervention (5/20 vs. 7/113, p = 0.02). Mortality in this group was not different (major vs. minor), and there were no differences in the incidence of complications. Twelve patients (9%) required operation, all for hemodynamic instability, all within 24 h, and 11/12 within 6 h. At operation 8/12 patients had other sources of bleeding beside the liver injury, and 7/12 had minor hepatic injuries. The operative patients had higher ISS and AIS scores (head/neck, chest, abdomen, extremities) than those managed nonoperatively. More patients died in the operative group (6/12 vs. 8/121, p = 0.0003). There were more pulmonary (6/12 vs. 16/121, p = 0.005), cardiovascular (6/12 vs. 19/121, p = 0.01), and infectious (5/12 vs. 20/121, p = 0.049) complications in the operative group. There were 14 deaths overall; 13/14 were due to traumatic brain injury, and 8/14 required urgent operation for hemorrhage. Conclusions:   In conclusion, grading of liver injuries does not seem to influence immediate management. Physiologic behavior dictated management and need for operative intervention, as well as prognosis. However, both major hepatic injuries and need for early operation reflected overall severity and the possibility of associated injuries.     

Selective management of blunt hepatic injuries including nonoperative management is a safe and effective strategy

BACKGROUND: The justification and preference for operative versus nonoperative management of hepatic injuries caused by blunt trauma remains ambiguous. This review assesses the outcome of operative and nonoperative management of liver injury after blunt trauma. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the demographics, severity of injury, severity of liver injury, associated concomitant injuries, management scheme, and outcome of patients with documented hepatic injury from 1993 to 2003. RESULTS: The overall mortality rate was 9.4%, with 3.7% caused by the liver injury itself. Fifty-nine percent (330 of 561) of liver injuries were of low severity (grades I and II), with an overall mortality rate of 6.6% caused by concomitant injuries and liver-related mortality of 0%. Forty-one percent (231 of 561) of liver injuries were high-severity injuries (grades III, IV, and V). Mortality for nonoperative management of high-severity liver injuries was 2.2%. If operative intervention was required because of hemodynamic instability or concomitant injuries then the mortality rate was significantly higher at 30%. Forty-two of the 378 (11%) liver injuries treated nonoperatively required an adjunctive procedure for successful management. CONCLUSIONS: Selective management of liver injuries presented a low liver-related mortality rate. Low-grade injuries can be managed nonoperatively with excellent results. High-grade injuries can be managed nonoperatively, if operative intervention is not required for hemodynamic instability or associated injuries, with a low mortality. In these patients, adjunctive procedures will be required selectively for successful nonoperative management of high-grade liver injuries. High-grade injuries requiring operative management because of hemodynamic instability or concomitant injuries continue to have significantly higher mortality.     

AAST organ injury scale: correlation of CT-graded liver injuries and operative findings

The Organ Injury Scaling Committee of the AAST recently published a consensus classification of splenic, hepatic, and renal injuries (J Trauma, 29:1664, 1989). The hepatic injury scale (HIS), based on parenchymal laceration and intrahepatic hematoma, includes grades 1 to 6, representing the least to most severe injury. This study classifies liver injuries by findings at celiotomy, correlates operative findings with transfusion requirements and method of management of liver injury, and relates preoperative CT to anatomic findings at laparotomy. Thirty-seven patients with blunt liver injury were evaluated by abdominal CT with and without intravenous contrast and then underwent celiotomy. Increasing operative HIS correlated well with increasing severity of injury as measured by transfusions and operative management. Thirty-one CT grades did not correlate with operative findings (84%). Four patients had intrahepatic hematomas that were not discovered at operation. Twelve lacerations were graded too high by CT and 15 too low. Of these 15, ten CT scores were at least two grades lower than operative findings. Injuries around the falciform ligament occurred in three of the low misclassifications. One patient with intrahepatic hematoma developed hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm. We conclude that the HIS readily characterizes operative findings of hepatic lacerations and that increasing operative grade correlates well with transfusion requirements and operative management. CT can define intrahepatic hematomas, but does not correlate well with hepatic lacerations. Extreme caution is required when using CT alone to define "minimal" liver injury for prospective management of blunt trauma victims.     

Operative vs nonoperative management of blunt pancreatic trauma in children

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of nonoperative vs operative management of blunt pancreatic trauma in children.

Methods

Retrospective review of pancreatic injuries from 1995 to 2006 at an urban level I regional pediatric trauma center.

Results

Forty-three children with pancreatic injury were included in the analysis. Injuries included grade I (n = 18), grade II (n = 6), grade III (n = 17), and grade IV (n = 2). For grade II to IV injuries, patients managed operatively (n = 14) and nonoperatively (n = 11) had similar lengths of stay and rates of readmission, despite increased pancreatic complications (PCs) in the nonoperative cohort (21% vs 73%; P = .02). There was a trend toward increased non-PCs in patients managed with resection (P = .07). Twelve patients underwent successful diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in which duct injury was identified. In this group, nonoperative management was pursued in 6 patients but was associated with increased rates of PC (86% nonoperative vs 29% operative; P = .02).

Conclusions

Operative management of children with grades II to IV pancreatic injury results in significantly decreased rates of PCs but fails to decrease length of stay in the hospital, possibly as a result of non-PCs. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography may serve as a useful diagnostic modality for guiding operative vs nonoperative management decisions.