Abdominal vascular trauma occurs in a small proportion of patients admitted in trauma centers. However, up to a quarter or a third of the patients who require a laparotomy will have a vascular injury. Preoperative identification is impossible in most cases, therefore, surgeons must be prepared for its early intraoperative recognition to allow appropriate management. This include temporary bleeding control techniques, identification of the probable injured vessel and the specific approach and management. Often, recognition of exsanguinating intra-abdominal hemorrhage will lead to immediate surgical indication, with activation of damage control protocols and consideration of early aortic occlusion.This paper illustrates the applications of damage control in the management of patients with abdominal vascular trauma.

No abstract

Damage control techniques applied to the management of thoracic injuries have evolved over the last 15 years. Despite the limited number of publications, information is sufficient to scatter some fears and establish management principles. The severity of the anatomical injury justifies the procedure of damage control in only few selected cases. In most cases, the magnitude of the physiological derangement and the presence of other sources of bleeding within the thoracic cavity or in other body compartments constitutes the indication for the abbreviated procedure. The classification of lung injuries as peripheral, transfixing, and central or multiple, provides a guideline for the transient bleeding control and for the definitive management of the injury: pneumorraphy, wedge resection, tractotomy or anatomical resection, respectively. Identification of specific patterns such as the need for resuscitative thoracotomy, or aortic occlusion, the existence of massive hemothorax, a central lung injury, a tracheobronchial injury, a major vascular injury, multiple bleeding sites as well as the recognition of hypothermia, acidosis or coagulopathy, constitute the indication for a damage control thoracotomy. In these cases, the surgeon executes an abbreviated procedure with packing of the bleeding surfaces, primary management with packing of some selected peripheral or transfixing lung injuries, and the postponement of lung resection, clamping of the pulmonary hilum in the most selective way possible. The abbreviation of the thoracotomy closure is achieved by suturing the skin over the wound packed, or by installing a vacuum system. The management of the patient in the intensive care unit will allow identification of those who require urgent reintervention and the correction of the physiological derangement in the remaining patients for their scheduled reintervention and definitive management.

Background Abdominal compartment syndrome is a sustained intra‐abdominal pressure (IAP) >20 mm Hg associated with new organ dysfunction. In order to prevent its development and related complications, IAP monitoring should be performed in patients with risk factors. Although techniques for its monitoring have been developed, they are of high cost and not always available in low‐ and lower–middle‐income countries. Therefore, we aim to develop and validate in a bench model a handcrafted catheter to be used as an alternative method to measure the intra‐gastric pressure (IGP) as a surrogate of the IAP. Methods We used an acrylic water container as a model of the abdomen and four handcrafted catheters made of a 16 Fr Levin tube with a globe finger tied with silk in the distal end, inflated with 1 cm of air. They were placed on the bottom of the container where the water pressure was directly measured as a gold standard. The agreement between the two measures was assessed with the Bland–Altman method. Results We performed 120 simultaneous measures. The mean pressure difference was 0.218 (95% CI 0.074 to 0.363). Conclusions The handcrafted prototype catheter and the direct measure were highly correlated. The new catheter is a reliable and reproducible tool for pressure monitoring. However, before it can be used in the clinical setting for IAP monitoring, validation in human models in a real clinical setting needs to be performed.

Background Penetrating diaphragmatic injuries are associated with a high incidence of posttraumatic empyema. We analyzed the contribution of trauma severity, specific organ injury, contamination severity, and surgical management to the risk of posttraumatic empyema in patients who underwent surgical repair of diaphragmatic injuries at a level 1 trauma center. Methods This is a retrospective review of the patients who survived more than 48 h. Univariate OR calculations were performed to identify potential risk factors. Multiple logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted ORs and identify independent risk factors. Results We included 192 patients treated from 2011 to 2020. There were 169 (88.0) males. The mean interquartile range, (IQR) of age, was 27 (22–35) years. Gunshot injuries occurred in 155 subjects (80.7%). Mean (IQR) NISS and ATI were 29 (18–44) and 17 (10–27), respectively. Thoracic AIS was > 3 in 38 patients (19.8%). Hollow viscus was injured in 105 cases (54.7%): stomach in 65 (33.9%), colon in 52 (27.1%), small bowel in 42 (21.9%), and duodenum in 10 (5.2%). Visible contamination was found in 76 patients (39.6%). Potential thoracic contamination was managed with a chest tube in 128 cases (66.7%), with transdiaphragmatic pleural lavage in 42 (21.9%), and with video-assisted thoracoscopy surgery or thoracotomy in 22 (11.5%). Empyema occurred in 11 patients (5.7%). Multiple logistic regression identified thoracic AIS > 3 (OR 6.4, 95% CI 1.77–23. 43), and visible contamination (OR 5.13, 95% IC 1.26–20.90) as independent risk factors. The individual organ injured, or the method used to manage the thoracic contamination did not affect the risk of posttraumatic empyema. Conclusion The severity of the thoracic injury and the presence of visible abdominal contamination were identified as independent risk factors for empyema after penetrating diaphragmatic trauma.