Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 1/2008

01-01-2008

Laparoscopy versus laparotomy in management of abdominal trauma

Authors: Mechail Cherkasov, Viktor Sitnikov, B. Sarkisyan, Oleg Degtirev, Michail Turbin, Abdulkadir Yakuba

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 1/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

A majority of abdominal injuries (AIs) are associated with shock, hence most of the patients are hemodynamically unstable, which limits the use of video-assisted laparoscopy (VAL) in their management. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the possibility of using VAL in management of stable and unstable patients with abdominal trauma.

Methods

In a period of six years 2,695 patients with AIs were evaluated. The subjects were evaluated retrospectively and divided into two groups. Group 1, consisting of 1,363 patients, had conventional routine investigations following which they underwent laparotomy for confirmatory diagnosis and definitive management. The second group, consisting of 1,332 patients, underwent diagnostic laparoscopy in addition to the conventional investigations in the first group; 411 patients of this group had therapeutic laparoscopy.
Demographic information, incidence of organs injuries and operative findings, success rate of VAL and laparotomy repair, complications, associated injuries, and hospital mortality were evaluated.

Results

The age of 62.6% of our patients was 20–50 years, while 10.6% and 14.5% were less than 19 and greater than 50 years, respectively. Associated injuries were head, chest, musculoskeletal, and vertebral column. Most of the victims presented with shock; 50.7%, 24.7%, and 15.9% of the patients were in mild, moderate, and severe shock respectively, and 8.7% of the subjects had stable hemodynamic status. In the first group 47.1% of the laparotomies were absolutely indicated and 24.4% were negative. Of the patients who had laparotomy, 26.0% would have been managed confidently by VAL. In the second group following VAL 42.5% of the patients did not require surgical intervention. VAL surgery was performed in 30.8% of patients. Conversion to laparotomy was performed in 26.7% of the patients.

Conclusions

The VAL technique can be confidently used as a main tool to expedite evaluation and treatment of patients with abdominal trauma in cases of both stable and unstable hemodynamic status.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Carey JE, Koo R, Miller R, Stein M (1995) Laparoscopy and thoracoscopy in evaluation abdominal trauma. Am Surg 61:92–95PubMed Carey JE, Koo R, Miller R, Stein M (1995) Laparoscopy and thoracoscopy in evaluation abdominal trauma. Am Surg 61:92–95PubMed
2.
go back to reference Demetriades D, Velmahos G (2003) Technology-driven triage of abdominal trauma. The emerging era of nonoperative management. Annu Rev Med 54:1–15PubMedCrossRef Demetriades D, Velmahos G (2003) Technology-driven triage of abdominal trauma. The emerging era of nonoperative management. Annu Rev Med 54:1–15PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Friese R, Coln C, Gentilello L (2005) Laparoscopy is sufficient to exclude occult diaphragm injury after penetrating abdominal trauma. J Trauma 58:789–792PubMedCrossRef Friese R, Coln C, Gentilello L (2005) Laparoscopy is sufficient to exclude occult diaphragm injury after penetrating abdominal trauma. J Trauma 58:789–792PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Jason S, Erica C, Scott D, Bin J, Michael S (2005) Abdominal trauma: a disease in evolution. ANZ J Surg 75:790–810CrossRef Jason S, Erica C, Scott D, Bin J, Michael S (2005) Abdominal trauma: a disease in evolution. ANZ J Surg 75:790–810CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Juan A, Hector A, William V, Walter W, Esteban G, Gustavo A, James M, George V, Demetrios D (2002) Penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries: ongoing dilemma-which cavity and when? World J Surg 26:539–543CrossRef Juan A, Hector A, William V, Walter W, Esteban G, Gustavo A, James M, George V, Demetrios D (2002) Penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries: ongoing dilemma-which cavity and when? World J Surg 26:539–543CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Lawrence W, Gerard M (2003) Management of injured patients. In: James R, William C, Frank R (eds) Current surgical diagnosis and treatment. Lange, New York, pp. 230–255 Lawrence W, Gerard M (2003) Management of injured patients. In: James R, William C, Frank R (eds) Current surgical diagnosis and treatment. Lange, New York, pp. 230–255
7.
go back to reference Lujan A, Parrilla P, Robles R, Torralba J, Sanchez F, Arenas J (1995) Laparoscopic surgery in the management of traumatic hemoperitoneum in stable patients. Surg Endosc 9:879–881 Lujan A, Parrilla P, Robles R, Torralba J, Sanchez F, Arenas J (1995) Laparoscopic surgery in the management of traumatic hemoperitoneum in stable patients. Surg Endosc 9:879–881
8.
go back to reference Martinez M, Briz J, Carillo1 E (2001) Video thoracoscopy expedites the diagnosis and treatment of penetrating diaphragmatic injuries. Surg Endosc 15:28–32PubMedCrossRef Martinez M, Briz J, Carillo1 E (2001) Video thoracoscopy expedites the diagnosis and treatment of penetrating diaphragmatic injuries. Surg Endosc 15:28–32PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy in management of abdominal trauma
Authors
Mechail Cherkasov
Viktor Sitnikov
B. Sarkisyan
Oleg Degtirev
Michail Turbin
Abdulkadir Yakuba
Publication date
01-01-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 1/2008
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9550-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2008

Surgical Endoscopy 1/2008 Go to the issue