scholarly journals Comparative study of abdominal cavity temporary closure techniques for damage control

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 368-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARCELO A. F. RIBEIRO JR ◽  
EMILY ALVES BARROS ◽  
SABRINA MARQUES DE CARVALHO ◽  
VINICIUS PEREIRA NASCIMENTO ◽  
JOSÉ CRUVINEL NETO ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT The damage control surgery, with emphasis on laparostomy, usually results in shrinkage of the aponeurosis and loss of the ability to close the abdominal wall, leading to the formation of ventral incisional hernias. Currently, various techniques offer greater chances of closing the abdominal cavity with less tension. Thus, this study aims to evaluate three temporary closure techniques of the abdominal cavity: the Vacuum-Assisted Closure Therapy - VAC, the Bogotá Bag and the Vacuum-pack. We conducted a systematic review of the literature, selecting 28 articles published in the last 20 years. The techniques of the bag Bogotá and Vacuum-pack had the advantage of easy access to the material in most centers and low cost, contrary to VAC, which, besides presenting high cost, is not available in most hospitals. On the other hand, the VAC technique was more effective in reducing stress at the edges of lesions, removing stagnant fluids and waste, in addition to acting at the cellular level by increasing proliferation and cell division rates, and showed the highest rates of primary closure of the abdominal cavity.

2014 ◽  
Vol 80 (9) ◽  
pp. 910-913 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Mackowski ◽  
Rebecca E. Barnett ◽  
Brian G. Harbrecht ◽  
Keith R. Miller ◽  
Glen A. Franklin ◽  
...  

Damage control surgery involves an abbreviated operation followed by resuscitation with planned re-exploration. Damage control techniques can be used in thoracic trauma but has been infrequently reported. Our goal is to describe our experience with the use of damage control techniques in treating thoracic trauma. A retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing damage control thoracic surgery related to trauma from January 1, 2010, to January 1, 2013, at University of Louisville Hospital, a Level I trauma center. Variables studied included injury characteristics, Injury Severity Score, surgery performed, duration of packing, length of stay (LOS), ventilator days, transfusion requirements, complications, and mortality. Twenty-five patients underwent damage control surgery in the chest with packing, temporary closure, and planned re-exploration after stabilization. Seventeen patients underwent anterolateral thoracotomy, and eight patients underwent sternotomy. The mean LOS and duration of temporary packing was 20.6 and 1.4 days in the thoracotomy group, respectively, and 19.5 and 1 day in the sternotomy group, respectively. The overall mortality rate was 40 per cent, 35 per cent in the thoracotomy group and 50 per cent in the sternotomy group. Like in severe abdominal trauma, damage control techniques can be used in the management of severe thoracic injuries with acceptable results.


2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. e4084794
Author(s):  
Carlos Serna ◽  
José Julian Serna ◽  
Yaset Caicedo ◽  
Natalia Padilla ◽  
Linda M Gallego ◽  
...  

The spleen is one of the most commonly injured solid organs of the abdominal cavity and an early diagnosis can reduce the associated mortality. Over the past couple of decades, management of splenic injuries has evolved to a prefered non-operative approach even in severely injured cases. However, the optimal surgical management of splenic trauma in severely injured patients remains controversial. This article aims to present an algorithm for the management of splenic trauma in severely injured patients, that includes basic principles of damage control surgery and is based on the experience obtained by the Trauma and Emergency Surgery Group (CTE) of Cali, Colombia. The choice between a conservative or a surgical approach depends on the hemodynamic status of the patient. In hemodynamically stable patients, a computed tomography angiogram should be performed to determine if non-operative management is feasible and if angioembolization is required. While hemodynamically unstable patients should be transferred immediately to the operating room for damage control surgery, which includes splenic packing and placement of a negative pressure dressing, followed by angiography with embolization of any ongoing arterial bleeding. It is our recommendation that both damage control principles and emerging endovascular technologies should be applied to achieve splenic salvage when possible. However, if surgical bleeding persists a splenectomy may be required as a definitive lifesaving maneuver.


2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S 01) ◽  
pp. S08-S13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luigi Valdatta ◽  
Pierluigi Tos ◽  
Salvatore D'Arpa ◽  
Luigi Troisi ◽  
Pellegatta Igor ◽  
...  

AbstractThe concept of damage control orthopaedics (DCO) is a strategy that focuses on managing orthopaedic injuries in polytrauma patients who are in an unstable physiological state. The concept of DCO is an extension of damage control surgery or damage limitation surgery (DCS/DLS). Recently, it has become clear that certain patients, following extensive soft tissue trauma, could benefit from the idea of DCS. In the management of severe lower extremity trauma with exposed fracture sites, aggressive early wound excision debridement, early internal fixation, and vascularized wound coverage within a few days after trauma were proposed. A negative-pressure dressing can be easily and rapidly applied to obtain a temporary closure between surgical stages. While negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has clear indications in the management of chronic wounds, its applications in the acute setting in victims of polytrauma are uneven. We conducted a review of the current clinical literature to evaluate the role of NPWT in this field, which points out that the negative pressure, applied immediately after the first debridement, seems to be an optimal bridge to the final reconstruction up to 7 days.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. e000381
Author(s):  
Daniel Jonathan Gross ◽  
Michael C Smith ◽  
Bardiya Zangbar-Sabegh ◽  
Kenneth Chao ◽  
Erin Chang ◽  
...  

IntroductionWith the popularization of damage control surgery and the use of the open abdomen, a new permutation of fistula arose; the enteroatmospheric fistula (EAF), an opening of exposed intestine spilling uncontrollably into the peritoneal cavity. EAF is the most devastating complication of the open abdomen. We describe and analyze a single institution’s experience in controlling high-output EAFs in patients with peritonitis.MethodsWe analyzed 189 consecutive procedures to achieve and maintain definitive control of 24 EAFs in 13 patients between 2006 and 2017. EAFs followed surgery for either trauma (seven patients) or non-traumatic abdominal conditions (six patients). All procedures were mapped onto an operative timeline and analyzed for: success in achieving definitive control, number of reoperations, and feasibility of bedside procedures in the surgical intensive care unit. The end point was controlled enteric drainage through a healed abdominal wound.ResultsThere was a mean delay of 8.5 days (range 2–46 days) from the index operation until the EAF was identified. Most EAFs required several attempts (mean: 2.7 per patient, range 1–7) until definitive control was achieved. Multiple reoperations were then required to maintain control (mean: 13). While the most effective techniques were endoscopic (1) and proximal diversion (1), these were applicable only in select circumstances. A ‘floating stoma’ where the fistula edges are sutured to an opening in a temporary closure device, while technically effective, required multiple reoperations. Tube drainage through a negative pressure dressing (tube vac) required the most maintenance usually through bedside procedures. Primary closure almost always failed. Twelve of the 13 patients survived.ConclusionAn EAF is a highly complex surgical challenge. Successful source control of the potentially lethal ongoing peritonitis requires tenacity and tactical flexibility. The appropriate control technique is often found by trial and error and must be creatively tailored to the individual circumstances of the patient.


2020 ◽  
pp. 231-233
Author(s):  
M.Yu. Nychytailo

Background. Sepsis is a life-threatening acute organ dysfunction that occurs as a result of dysregulation of the macroorganism’s response to infection. Septic shock is a variant of sepsis characterized by the circulatory failure, manifested by hypotension and increased lactate levels >2 mmol/L despite adequate infusion, which requires the administration of vasopressors to maintain average blood pressure >65 mm Hg. Objective. To describe the management of patients with abdominal sepsis. Materials and methods. Analysis of literature data on this topic. Results and discussion. Complicated intra-abdominal infection (IAI) is the growth of pathogenic microorganisms in a usually sterile abdominal cavity, usually due to the perforation of the hollow organs. Uncomplicated IAI involves transmural inflammation of the digestive tract, which does not spread beyond the hollow organ. If uncomplicated IAI are not treated, there is a possibility that they will progress to complicated ones. Measures to control the source of infection include the drainage of abscesses or places of accumulation of infected fluid, removal of necrotic infected tissues and restoration of the anatomy and functions of the affected area. Several multivariate studies have found that failure to adequately control the source of infection is a risk factor for adverse outcomes and death in patients with IAI. Surviving sepsis and other recommendations also support the need for early control of the source of infection. In a study by B. Tellor et al. (2012) mortality was 9.5 % among individuals with adequate control of the infection source and 33.3 % among patients who failed to achieve such control. In some situations, it is advisable to manage patients conservatively. Thus, in appendicular infiltration, most studies have demonstrated the benefits of conservative management (Andersson R.E., Petzold M.G., 2007). Management of IAI without final control of the primary source is possible in cases where the organism has already overcome the infection, and surgery can only increase the number of complications. In general, patients with localized infections may need less invasive management. Thus, percutaneous drainage can be used for localized accumulations of fluid in the abdominal cavity. 80-92 % of drainage procedures are successful on the first attempt. <5 % of patients require surgical treatment. Such drainage procedures are used in infected pancreatic necrosis, and the final debridement of the infection source may be delayed. In critically ill patients, damage control laparotomy and limited intervention (resection without reanastomosis or stoma formation, temporary drainage and tamponade of the abdominal cavity if necessary, temporary closure of the abdominal cavity) are performed to control the infection. Indications for damage control laparotomy include inability to achieve adequate control of the source of IAI during primary laparotomy, hemodynamic instability, the need to re-evaluate the condition of the problematic anastomosis, and diffuse peritonitis. A prospective study of staged laparotomies revealed a shorter length of stay in the intensive care unit, a lower incidence of complications and lower treatment costs using this method compared to the standard one. Antibacterial support of surgical interventions is an important aspect of treatment. In conditions of increasing antibiotic resistance, antibiotics should be prescribed strictly in accordance with the recommendations and for as short effective period as possible. Conclusions. 1. Despite the fact that approaches are changing, control of the IAI source remains the main method of treatment of most patients with IAI. 2. The choice of empirical antibacterial therapy should be based on the risk assessment and potential of resistant bacteria. 3. The duration of antimicrobial therapy can be significantly reduced (4 days).


2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-230
Author(s):  
Mustafa Ugur ◽  
◽  
Cem Oruc ◽  
Ihsan Yildiz ◽  
Yavuz Savas Koca ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document