Academic literature on the topic 'Hollow viscus injuries'

Delay in the recognition of hollow viscus injury may lead to increased morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately the early diagnosis of these injuries remains a diagnostic challenge increasing the likelihood of delay. Patients transferred to Level I trauma centers from outlying institutions may be at increased risk of morbidity from hollow viscus injury, as there is an inherent delay associated with transfer. Herein we reviewed our institution's 11-year experience with the diagnosis and treatment of hollow viscus injury caused by blunt mechanism. Forty-one patients met defined criteria of hollow viscus injury. Patients were stratified into two groups: interval to operating room ≤24 hours versus >24 hours. Length of hospital stay, number of ventilator days, and percentage of patients developing acute respiratory distress syndrome were significantly greater in the >24-hour group. Mortality was not significantly different between the groups (26.7% vs 36.4%). Patients transferred from other institutions were more likely to experience complications and operative delay. In conclusion delay in operative intervention (>24 hours) adversely affected outcomes. Early transfer of patients to Level I trauma centers may improve outcomes. A high index of suspicion and the use of multiple diagnostic modalities may lead to earlier operative treatment and improved outcome.

<strong>Background:&nbsp;</strong>Trauma is a serious health issue in every country, and it sadly accounts for 60&ndash;70% of all emergency hospital admissions. Patients who have suffered trauma require the highest level of treatment since they can often be saved the most. For patients between the ages of 12 and 45, traumatic injuries continue to be the primary cause of death and a significant cause of morbidity. Following blunt abdominal trauma, hollow viscus damage is a rare diagnosis. Injuries to the hollow viscus that occur after abdominal trauma range from 2 to 15% in frequency. Traumatic hollow viscus and mesenteric injury (HVMI) has a high mortality and complication rate despite its rarity. Regarding its ideal management, there is no agreement. Hollow viscus injuries (HVIs) have a significant mortality and morbidity rate, however they are a rare but potentially fatal disorder. There are other ceCT scan criteria that have been published for the diagnosis of HVMI, however none of them have, as of yet, been linked to adequate sensitivity and specificity when assessed separately.&nbsp;<strong>Aim:</strong>&nbsp;The aim of this study was to analyze patients undergoing surgery for blunt or penetrating bowel trauma to identify prognostic factors with particular attention to the influence of diagnostic delay on outcome.&nbsp;<strong>Material and Method:&nbsp;</strong>In the Department of General Surgery, a prospective, nonrandomized, descriptive study was done. Patients present across a wide variety of ages, with the youngest patient being 16 years old and the oldest patient being 65. written authorization signed by the patient or their trusted caregivers after receiving full disclosure. The study included all patients with brutal and penetrating injuries who underwent a pre-operative ceCT followed by a laparotomy. A 64 detector multirow scanner was used to do the multiphasic torso ceCT scan from the base of the skull to the pubis. The contrast agent was injected at a rate of 3&ndash;4 ml/sec at 1.7 ml/kg body weight. Pre-contrast, arterial phase with trigger at 150 HU in the thoracic aorta, and venous phase were the three phases of the protocol that were used. Patients who agreed to participate in the trial with their guardians&rsquo; permission provided signed informed consent.&nbsp;<strong>Results:&nbsp;</strong>The values of ceCT and of a single ceCT criteria for substantial HVMI requiring surgical correction in terms of sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, and accuracy. With at least one affirmative criterion, preoperative ceCT demonstrated strong sensitivity and a low incidence of false negative instances. The more diagnostic criteria for HVMI there are, the higher the ceCT&rsquo;s positive predictive value becomes. Patients with HVMI were more likely to be men and had more serious thoracic injuries. The most common condition in cases of multiple intestinal traumas was the combination of colon and mesenteric injuries.&nbsp;<strong>Conclusion:&nbsp;</strong>In conclusion, when combined with a specific clinical observation, evolving technologies and skill have rendered ceCT in trauma both a viable exam to choose patients for surgical exploration when several criteria are present and a reliable screening test to exclude serious HVMI. Further prospective studies are necessary to better establish not only the diagnostic capacity of ceCT on HVMI but also the capacity to link imaging results with appropriate treatment indications given the significance of these results on the management of trauma patients. &nbsp; &nbsp;

Background: The diagnosis of hollow viscus injury with advanced diagnostic tools and management of trauma by conservative and surgically by laparotomy and correction of anatomy. Hence such injuries are frequently overlooked leading to increased morbidity and mortality. Thus, this study is intended to throw light upon the prompt diagnosis and management of hollow viscus injuries in trauma. Hence the aim of the present research was to study the diagnosis and management of hollow viscus injuries. Subjects and Methods: A total of 100 cases were included in the study. All the patients were above the age of 11 years and maximum age of 80 years. Most of the patients included were male with ration of 4:1. After recording of history clinical examination followed by radiological, serological and operative findings were recorded. Data was analyse to study the male: female ratio, etiologies of viscous injury, investigation done and possible management for the treatment. Results: On analysis of the data, most common reason for the abdominal trauma was found to be road traffic accident followed by stab injury. The maximum of the patients belong to the age group of 2 to 30 years. Most common reason for the abdominal trauma was found to be road traffic accident followed by stab injury. Conclusion: It is mostly seen in the age group of 21-30 years which form the young and reproductive group. These patients’ measures should be taken to prevent these accidents and care of victims at the accident site. Well established trauma care centers should be established at least at every taluk hospital. Measures for early transport of the patients from the accident site to the trauma care centres to be undertaken.